After playing 3-4 days of skyrim honestly I got bored. It's no where near as good as the amazing game that was morrowind, dumbed down imo, made for casual players..even on Master difficulty it's easy. It has the pieces but the glue isnt strong enough to hold it all together, it just doesn't draw me in Story isn't paticularly great and there are alot of repetitive fetch quests. The game is definitely worth the money...but it's not amazing by any means.

Imo GOTY should go to Deus Ex human revolution... beautiful art direction, incredible music, superb story..it's a game that kept my attention. It was one of those games that keeps me thinking every day. Definitely lives up to the original.

I really really hope it gets at least one GOTY award.

PCGAMER Fingers crossed.

Vasarto

21st Nov 2011, 03:19

After playing 3-4 days of skyrim honestly I got bored.

Because your stupid

It's no where near as good as the amazing game that was morrowind, dumbed down imo, This forum is about Deus Ex and not anything made by Bethesda and your wrong and I am gonna tear into you and tell you and proove that 1. You never played a single minute of skyrim. 2. Your just trolling to make people angry. 3. Have no idea what your talking about.

1. Skyrim has better graphics
2.Skyrim has Duel Weilding and duel cast magic and Perks to make your skills better.
3. You are no longer restricted to a set of 7 major skills and minor skills which means your path can be whatever you want it to be. Which 100% of anyone whom has ever once played a Elder scrolls game all unaminously agree that it is the most wonderful idea that they have ever possibly came up with since the idea to make Elder scrolls 2.

4.The games reviews are in and its good. This comes from reader reviews (players like me who actually played the game) and the editors of the web sites, Magazines and t.v shows.

5. Combat in morrowind was crappy and everyone knows it. Falling down constantly, Not ever hitting all the time. Even when your in a area where enemies should fall to your blade. The animations and fact that your two inches from an enemy and blade hit 40% of the time made battle boring and magic was not all that great.

In skyrim you have lasting streams of fire,ice or lightning that "actually have effects" now Lightning can temperarly paralize your enemy. Burning ALWAYS deals lasting damage and for the first time ever Frost damage actually does something. It slows the enemy.

Morrowind had none of that. It also didn't have oil on the ground you can light and kill your enemies.

6. More playable hour in skyrim

7.More factions in Skyrim and infinite side quests..thats right...In..fin..ite Randomized side quests.

8. Dragons...dumb ars.

9.Better music...not an opinion. There are some things that are opinion and others that no matter who you are or what your beliefs are. You HAVE no opinion. Lets take the anime (something you should be familiar with) called Hellsing. Some like it others dont. But EVERY one! Abso*******lutely ever last person on the ******* planet can agree its better than the anime Wedding Peach!

I dont care if you actually liked that other one. Its NOT better no matter what your opinion of it or what you think about the situation your wrong.

10. My final reason for why your wrong and why Skyrim is obviously superior to Morrowind is the story is far more interesting. You know that little story line that happened in morrowind and than the oblivion crisis. It was all just the opening signs of what happens in skyrim. Basically the calm before the real storm.

Not like a peasant like you would ever know what it is like to try and kill a dragon or the world eater without placing it on its easiest difficulty....HA!

made for casual players..even on Master difficulty it's easy. It has the pieces but the glue isnt strong enough to hold it all together, it just doesn't draw me in Story isn't paticularly great and there are alot of repetitive fetch quests. The game is definitely worth the money...but it's not amazing by any means. Wrong on every account. You obviously have never played it and are a troll.

Imo GOTY should go to Deus Ex human revolution... beautiful art direction, incredible music, superb story..it's a game that kept my attention. It was one of those games that keeps me thinking every day. Definitely lives up to the original.

No it doesn't...not even close. It was a great game but it lacked so much in order to be a deus ex original.
Its a good step in a lot of good directions but fell half way back down the mountain and does deserve a lot of good awards but not GOTY.

itsonyourhead

21st Nov 2011, 04:20

Because your stupid

This forum is about Deus Ex and not anything made by Bethesda and your wrong and I am gonna tear into you and tell you and proove that 1. You never played a single minute of skyrim. 2. Your just trolling to make people angry. 3. Have no idea what your talking about.

1. Skyrim has better graphics

The Deus Ex forums is not the greatest place to lead with this. Since when have graphics mattered, like, ever, so long as they don't suck?

2.Skyrim has Duel Weilding and duel cast magic and Perks to make your skills better.

An interesting improvement to the combat mechanics, definitely, however, certain skills were removed/modified/simplified, leading to a less rewarding or engaging character development process.

3. You are no longer restricted to a set of 7 major skills and minor skills which means your path can be whatever you want it to be. Which 100% of anyone whom has ever once played a Elder scrolls game all unaminously agree that it is the most wonderful idea that they have ever possibly came up with since the idea to make Elder scrolls 2.

Though it may sound good on paper (to some people), what they have come up with hasn't worked at all. The problem is that the game levels to your level, but your real power comes from perks. This results in leveling up things you don't want to level up (and in the process facing tougher enemies than you are ready for). In fact, this new system forces players to specialize even more so in one area in order to maintain the ability to counter enemies. And if you discover mid game that you want to play a different type of character, you are going to be starting over anyway because you can't take back your perks, and they are what really matter. Not just that, but your character becomes and automatic Renaissance man, being able to do everything. And when everything is special, nothing is. You lose character definition through the lack of limitations. Character development is completely disconnected from the world and narrative, making your improvements seem almost magical and completely illogical.

You make a blatant hyperbole saying that all Elder Scrolls fans appreciate this move. You present no evidence to back up your claim. Is innuendo only with no logical force.

4.The games reviews are in and its good. This comes from reader reviews (players like me who actually played the game) and the editors of the web sites, Magazines and t.v shows.

Metacritic: 95%

Gets good scores != better game

5. Combat in morrowind was crappy and everyone knows it. Falling down constantly, Not ever hitting all the time. Even when your in a area where enemies should fall to your blade. The animations and fact that your two inches from an enemy and blade hit 40% of the time made battle boring and magic was not all that great.

Combat in Morrowind was crappy. But TES's strengths were never combat, but in role-playing. Skyrims combat is crappy too, a little less crappy, but still limited.

In skyrim you have lasting streams of fire,ice or lightning that "actually have effects" now Lightning can temperarly paralize your enemy. Burning ALWAYS deals lasting damage and for the first time ever Frost damage actually does something. It slows the enemy.

Morrowind had none of that. It also didn't have oil on the ground you can light and kill your enemies.

Skyrim features several game mechanic combat and stealth improvements. This is true - many borrowed from mods and Dark Messiah.

6. More playable hour in skyrim

This makes no sense.

7.More factions in Skyrim and infinite side quests..thats right...In..fin..ite Randomized side quests.

8. Dragons...dumb ars.
[/quotes]
The dragons were handled poorly, but as enemies come they are interesting.

[quote]
9.Better music...not an opinion. There are some things that are opinion and others that no matter who you are or what your beliefs are. You HAVE no opinion. Lets take the anime (something you should be familiar with) called Hellsing. Some like it others dont. But EVERY one! Abso*******lutely ever last person on the ******* planet can agree its better than the anime Wedding Peach!

I dont care if you actually liked that other one. Its NOT better no matter what your opinion of it or what you think about the situation your wrong.
I think this question is extremely subjective. If you brought a couple of musical experts to bear on the issue they might be able to say if the music is somehow technically "better". But all in all it comes down to taste. This is a subjective issue, and you provide no objective evidence.

10. My final reason for why your wrong and why Skyrim is obviously superior to Morrowind is the story is far more interesting. You know that little story line that happened in morrowind and than the oblivion crisis. It was all just the opening signs of what happens in skyrim. Basically the calm before the real storm.

http://www.brianchalfin.com/images/jokerserious.jpg

Not like a peasant like you would ever know what it is like to try and kill a dragon or the world eater without placing it on its easiest difficulty....HA!

Now I think I've been trolled. You aren't serious.

Wrong on every account. You obviously have never played it and are a troll.

????

No it doesn't...not even close. It was a great game but it lacked so much in order to be a deus ex original.
Its a good step in a lot of good directions but fell half way back down the mountain and does deserve a lot of good awards but not GOTY.

Maybe if Skyrim wasn't just a simplified and dumbed down rehash of Morrowind and Oblivion, I would say yes, it deserves GOTY. But it is, unfortunately. DX:HR is the far superior game in my opinion, and far more deserving of GOTY than Skyrim. Even 60% of Deus Ex's greatness is still better than most of what else is out there.

Romeo

21st Nov 2011, 04:47

Because your stupid

This forum is about Deus Ex and not anything made by Bethesda and your wrong and I am gonna tear into you and tell you and proove that 1. You never played a single minute of skyrim. 2. Your just trolling to make people angry. 3. Have no idea what your talking about.

1. Skyrim has better graphics
2.Skyrim has Duel Weilding and duel cast magic and Perks to make your skills better.
3. You are no longer restricted to a set of 7 major skills and minor skills which means your path can be whatever you want it to be. Which 100% of anyone whom has ever once played a Elder scrolls game all unaminously agree that it is the most wonderful idea that they have ever possibly came up with since the idea to make Elder scrolls 2.

4.The games reviews are in and its good. This comes from reader reviews (players like me who actually played the game) and the editors of the web sites, Magazines and t.v shows.

5. Combat in morrowind was crappy and everyone knows it. Falling down constantly, Not ever hitting all the time. Even when your in a area where enemies should fall to your blade. The animations and fact that your two inches from an enemy and blade hit 40% of the time made battle boring and magic was not all that great.

In skyrim you have lasting streams of fire,ice or lightning that "actually have effects" now Lightning can temperarly paralize your enemy. Burning ALWAYS deals lasting damage and for the first time ever Frost damage actually does something. It slows the enemy.

Morrowind had none of that. It also didn't have oil on the ground you can light and kill your enemies.

6. More playable hour in skyrim

7.More factions in Skyrim and infinite side quests..thats right...In..fin..ite Randomized side quests.

8. Dragons...dumb ars.

9.Better music...not an opinion. There are some things that are opinion and others that no matter who you are or what your beliefs are. You HAVE no opinion. Lets take the anime (something you should be familiar with) called Hellsing. Some like it others dont. But EVERY one! Abso*******lutely ever last person on the ******* planet can agree its better than the anime Wedding Peach!

I dont care if you actually liked that other one. Its NOT better no matter what your opinion of it or what you think about the situation your wrong.

10. My final reason for why your wrong and why Skyrim is obviously superior to Morrowind is the story is far more interesting. You know that little story line that happened in morrowind and than the oblivion crisis. It was all just the opening signs of what happens in skyrim. Basically the calm before the real storm.

Not like a peasant like you would ever know what it is like to try and kill a dragon or the world eater without placing it on its easiest difficulty....HA!

Wrong on every account. You obviously have never played it and are a troll.

No it doesn't...not even close. It was a great game but it lacked so much in order to be a deus ex original.
Its a good step in a lot of good directions but fell half way back down the mountain and does deserve a lot of good awards but not GOTY.
Right off the bat, if your argument is "your stupid", you've lost already (Bonus marks for screwing up the grammer while insulting someone else's intelligence).

As someone who HAS played The Elder Scrolls series since day one, I can honestly say his points are entirely valid: The series has been on a simplification ride since Daggerfall. Now, in Morrowind, this was justifiable as most of the unimportant details were better organized (For example, taking the multiple language skills and putting them in to one "Speechcraft" skill), along with a plethora or improvements, interesting aesthetics and still maintained a huge level of complexity. Oblivion took away a number of complex elements from the game, and Skyrim simplified itself further from there. For the improvements we get (Perk system, dual wielding, improved spells), we get even more simplified elements behind it (No more astral signs, no statistics, reduction in skills, no classes, quick travel). It also continues many of the flaws introduced in Oblivion (Level scaling, dull aesthetics, lack of weapon variety).

As for your other points, yes, it got rave reviews, from the same group of individuals who routinely hand Call of Duty 9.5s and 10s. Very concerning right there. More playable hours? That depends on perspective. Morrowind took a phenominally long time to try and improve all ones skills to their max, and to discover everything in it's map was an extremely long affair. Ignoring mods, even that on its own feels more fun than the time I spent with Skyrim. 200+ hours in Morrowind was amazing, and constantly played on curiousity. 20 hours in Skyrim already feels fairly dull, and extremely arduous. "Dragons, dumb ars"... Ignoring the fact you screwed up the spelling there too, one enemy does not make a game. Frankly, if that was your case, I consider Dagoth Ur a more interesting enemy than the dragons, which I've already played in numerous mods in both Morrowind and Oblivion. Music IS a matter of opinion. Frankly, I love the soundtrack in Need for Speed games, even though many people dislike them. Alternatively, many people like the new Forza soundtrack, while I do not. They aren't wrong, and I'm not wrong, it's simply opinion. As for graphics, sure, they're better. Of course they'd be, they've had ten years to improve them since Morrowind. If they weren't better, Bethesda would be the WORST company on the planet. Besides that, as I said, I find the aesthetic of Morrowind infinitely more interesting to look at then it's two successors.

Your post was so terrible, you probably set your own point back worse than if you'd simply remained silent.

Kodaemon

21st Nov 2011, 04:58

Bonus marks for screwing up the grammer

Too funny.

(Yes, I know it's spelling in this case, not grammar.)

Romeo

21st Nov 2011, 05:48

Too funny.

(Yes, I know it's spelling in this case, not grammar.)
He's going to get it now, thanks.

It needs to prevent more of these kinds of posts, as entertaining as they are.

originalDX

21st Nov 2011, 12:04

Right off the bat, if your argument is "your stupid", you've lost already (Bonus marks for screwing up the grammer while insulting someone else's intelligence).

As someone who HAS played The Elder Scrolls series since day one, I can honestly say his points are entirely valid: The series has been on a simplification ride since Daggerfall. Now, in Morrowind, this was justifiable as most of the unimportant details were better organized (For example, taking the multiple language skills and putting them in to one "Speechcraft" skill), along with a plethora or improvements, interesting aesthetics and still maintained a huge level of complexity. Oblivion took away a number of complex elements from the game, and Skyrim simplified itself further from there. For the improvements we get (Perk system, dual wielding, improved spells), we get even more simplified elements behind it (No more astral signs, no statistics, reduction in skills, no classes, quick travel). It also continues many of the flaws introduced in Oblivion (Level scaling, dull aesthetics, lack of weapon variety).

As for your other points, yes, it got rave reviews, from the same group of individuals who routinely hand Call of Duty 9.5s and 10s. Very concerning right there. More playable hours? That depends on perspective. Morrowind took a phenominally long time to try and improve all ones skills to their max, and to discover everything in it's map was an extremely long affair. Ignoring mods, even that on its own feels more fun than the time I spent with Skyrim. 200+ hours in Morrowind was amazing, and constantly played on curiousity. 20 hours in Skyrim already feels fairly dull, and extremely arduous. "Dragons, dumb ars"... Ignoring the fact you screwed up the spelling there too, one enemy does not make a game. Frankly, if that was your case, I consider Dagoth Ur a more interesting enemy than the dragons, which I've already played in numerous mods in both Morrowind and Oblivion. Music IS a matter of opinion. Frankly, I love the soundtrack in Need for Speed games, even though many people dislike them. Alternatively, many people like the new Forza soundtrack, while I do not. They aren't wrong, and I'm not wrong, it's simply opinion. As for graphics, sure, they're better. Of course they'd be, they've had ten years to improve them since Morrowind. If they weren't better, Bethesda would be the WORST company on the planet. Besides that, as I said, I find the aesthetic of Morrowind infinitely more interesting to look at then it's two successors.

Your post was so terrible, you probably set your own point back worse than if you'd simply remained silent.

If you want to talk simplified your beloved DE3 is a prime example of that. In fact it doesn't even deserve to be called an RPG (just an action hybrid) or Deus ex for that matter and it is totally a console port, next gen dumb down game.

And sony Girl think of what you are saying perks are they same as leveling up skills and attributes where you customize and the leveling up the skill you us the most is what Elderscrolls was doing in morrowind and oblivion
don't think you DE3 fan girls and boys know what you are talking about. This is the most ignorant bias forum group I ever encountered.

Ashpolt

21st Nov 2011, 12:32

This is the most ignorant bias forum group I ever encountered.

This must be your first forum then. By fanbase standard, we're actually pretty critical. There are very few people on here who reckon DXHR is flawless. I've seen far more (constructive) criticism on here than on any other game forum I've visited. On most game forums it's all blind praise / all outright 0/10 hatred all the time, with no middle ground inbetween. We're a far more conservative lot.

On topic: it'd be a tough call for me. I have more criticisms of DXHR than I do of Skyrim, but that's no doubt at least partly because I'm much more invested in the DX franchise than the Elder Scrolls. Skyrim also came somewhat "out of the blue" to me - though I was obviously aware it was coming, I wasn't really following it closely, and it was only really in the week coming up to launch that I got hyped, particularly when RPS claimed it to be better than Morrowind. By contrast, I'd been following the development of DXHR for 4 years or so by the time it launched, and had played the leak, so I already knew a good deal about what I was getting into before I played it. Skyrim was a complete surprise: I expected "Oblivion but dumbed down" but got so much more. DXHR, I already knew what to expect on launch day - "DX, somewhat dumbed down / streamlined, but also with some improvements." I'm also playing Skyrim right now, and it still has that "new game magic", whereas I haven't touched DXHR in a month or so. As such, it's very hard to be objective.

Plus, of course, there are some other competitors, at least IMO: Dark Souls and Minecraft, for instance. (It's officially released now, it counts as this year!)

In short: I am on the fence.

Kodaemon

21st Nov 2011, 12:36

Dark Souls has no PC version so it doesn't count.

68_pie

21st Nov 2011, 12:41

The Witcher 2 is the best game I've played this year.

bebop

21st Nov 2011, 14:58

Lol people get way too worked up, look I just gave my honest opinion, I wasn't trying to offend anybody. It really does perplex me as to why folks get so aggressive in discussions like these. (mental problems I assume) Im not berating Skyrim I just think it's not as good as the hype believes it to be.

Honestly Games journalism/reviewing these days, Is so unreliable, they either get paid upfront, or the reviewers are biased and incompetant (i.e Gametrailers) Skyrim no doubt deserves a nomination but so does Deus ex: HR.

As someone said earlier by no means is DE:HR flawless but it does a hell of a better job in retaining the overall qualities that made its predecessors a masterpiece. Skyrims modding community is amazing they're working around the clock to dramatically improve the game. But thats just it...they are doing the work..bethseda never listened to them in the first place and made a game that doesn't live up to expectation. (imo)

I suppose the final point im getting at, is how on earth people are surmising DE:HR isn't in the same league as SKYRIM ..is beyond me.

And trust me I could easily compare the two and pick apart skyrim, and as to why DE deserve goty more than TES.

and yeah..witcher 2 another rpg compared to skyrim..(unfavourabley i might add) is a game that is well underated.

bebop

21st Nov 2011, 15:08

If you want to talk simplified your beloved DE3 is a prime example of that. In fact it doesn't even deserve to be called an RPG (just an action hybrid) or Deus ex for that matter and it is totally a console port, next gen dumb down game.

And sony Girl think of what you are saying perks are they same as leveling up skills and attributes where you customize and the leveling up the skill you us the most is what Elderscrolls was doing in morrowind and oblivion
don't think you DE3 fan girls and boys know what you are talking about. This is the most ignorant bias forum group I ever encountered.

LOL...and SKYRIM isn't a worse console port?

DE:HR does a 10x better job in retaining the core aspects that makes a quality hardcore game on the pc, Skyrim does not.

IM GONNA SAY IT (IAM PREPARED FOR THE CONSEQUENCES) I believe skyrim is a shallow game, shallow storylines, shallow personalities, Shallow fetch quests, it's strengths simply lie-in in the fact bethseda has made a better sandbox experience than oblivion.

Its a good game overall..but not amazing..don't give into the hype man stay strong :P

Grimesy

21st Nov 2011, 16:03

Stupid reasoning everytime...
I win cause you're stupid...
No, I win because YOU are stupid...
Doh...

(And yes, TES seems to be dumbing down at every sequel,
but storywise they never fail me...

Ashpolt

21st Nov 2011, 16:05

DE:HR does a 10x better job in retaining the core aspects that makes a quality hardcore game on the pc, Skyrim does not.

Hey, Jean-Francois Dugas. How's it going? :rasp:

But seriously, I half agree with you, half don't. Skyrim may have made a greater number concessions to the "casual market" overall than DXHR did, but I think they had less of an impact on the overall game experience in Skyrim than they did in DXHR. In Skyrim, the concessions are things like reducing the number of skills and removing certain weapon types - unfortunate, but ultimately it's simply a scaling back rather than a change in the way you play, really. DXHR's "concessions to the casual" ultimately had a significant impact on the gameplay, with regenerating health removing a significant degree of resource management, third person making stealth a very simple exercise, flashy cinematic takedowns being used entirely in lieu of proper melee combat, etc. It's a smaller number of changes (arguably) but they have a greater impact.

Also, we've got to consider the ways - if any - in which each game offers a step in the right direction for each franchise. (We'll consider only the original DX as a comparison for DXHR here, as I think we can all agree that IW was an aberration which is best forgotten, whereas Oblivion - while disappointing in many ways - still managed to be a fairly strong entry to the franchise.) While DXHR makes a few improvements to the DX formula, there are enough problems that I think there's (at very least) a good argument to be made that overall it's a step back. Skyrim, on the other hand, seems to me to be almost an unquestionable improvement over Oblivion - the combat is better, the magic system is better, the level scaling (while still present) is improved, the main story is better, dragons are a much less irritating random occurence than Oblivion gates and (most importantly) the world is vastly more interesting to explore than Oblivion's. As far as I'm concerned, Skyrim represents a clear step in the right direction for the franchise in a way that DXHR, while still very strong, does not.

But still, it's very close. One thing working in DXHR's favour is that it's a fairly unique experience - the original DX was 10 years ago, and other than VtM:B, we've had nothing really like it since, even including Invisible War. With Skyrim, however, the last game in the franchise was only 5 years ago - still a long time by game standards, I know, but swords and sorcery RPGs have been ten a penny since (and indeed, before) then, so it's ultimately less fresh. Then again, I don't want to encourage "change for the sake of it", which I believe led to some of the larger issues with DXHR, so I can't mark Skyrim down too much for this.

In short, I remain on the fence.

VectorM

21st Nov 2011, 16:28

I only glanced the thread and I alreayd know it's filled with butthurt.

Edit; Not to mention the stupidity of directly comparing DX:HR with Skyrim. Why don't you compare GTA with Need for Speed while you are at it?

The Deus Ex forums is not the greatest place to lead with this. Since when have graphics mattered, like, ever, so long as they don't suck?

Not taking any sides in this, but you do realize, that a LOT of people on this forum complained about DX:HR's graphics, right?

Olgerth Heidern

21st Nov 2011, 17:53

Skyrim: Oblivion with Nords, dragons, worse interface (whodathunk) and just as many bugs.

Romeo

21st Nov 2011, 18:12

If you want to talk simplified your beloved DE3 is a prime example of that. In fact it doesn't even deserve to be called an RPG (just an action hybrid) or Deus ex for that matter and it is totally a console port, next gen dumb down game.

And sony Girl think of what you are saying perks are they same as leveling up skills and attributes where you customize and the leveling up the skill you us the most is what Elderscrolls was doing in morrowind and oblivion
don't think you DE3 fan girls and boys know what you are talking about. This is the most ignorant bias forum group I ever encountered.
I'm well aware it is - as I've frequently made a point to say (Clearly you haven't been here long enough). Now, it isn't an RPG - nor was Deus Ex for that matter. They're FPS/RPG hybrids at best, or FPS/Action-Stealth games at worst.

And let's review: One man arguing against a large community, and the community is wrong? That's like the drug-addled homeless person insisting everyone else in society is really the crazy one.

bebop

21st Nov 2011, 20:07

I really wanted to believe bethseda could push boundaries take it to the next level, but alas tis not true.
-Albeit the hard work from the modding community it doesn't change the fact the game is a bad port, (worse than most) but also full of bugs. (****ty UI, bad inventory management)
-Shallow storylines, shallow personalities, not as memorable as mass effect or Deus ex:hr, BG or witcher 2, half life series.
-They claimed to add a playable third person view. Lies piss poor third person, (should of presented the same working functionality as in dark souls third person) The Third person is so bad...why bother putting it in there in the first place?
-Art Direction was no where near as well established in game, as it was on the original concept art. (just because you copy and paste a million trees and rocks in a sandbox engine doesn't make it nice looking) Im not saying the atmosphere is bad it's just not as good as people claim it to be.
-combat mechanics claimed to be improved yet still feel oblivion ish (fake, melee system) (they should've had melee combat like dark souls Hardcore and deep)
-The rpg depth to the game in terms of cause and effects is no where near as good as I hoped it to be, the results of decisions and completion of side quests even guild quests have the most minimal or no impact on the game world, Aside from the main quest. Bethseda havn't really improved this element that much at all since oblivion. I expected skyrim to be was a vastly improved world whereby actions in one place would have far reaching impacts on the other side of the world (i.e map) something small happens in one town and it affects another.
-All these randomly generated events seem like placeholders. i.e fetch quests and random robbers running up to you telling u to keep their stolen stuff while they hide behind some rock. They have no meaning no impact they're boring.
Skyrim does feel like a living breathing world, but does that world work properly? no, the elements still feel detached and pointless. It's definitely a case of Quantity over Quality.
The game is good 8/10 good but no more, Games journalists and reviewers really do mislead consumers these days, all all this fanboy hype keeps devs lazy.
(Oblivion and Skyrim are defo not as good as daggerfall and morrowind) talk about going backwards
P.s this is not about comparison this about how reviewers and fans overhype everything and in result are incapable of providing a fair and objective opinion on a game. Misleading for potential customers who want know what a paticular game is really like.

Skyrim stroy plot...lets just says it's no 'reign of fire' :P

*edit* and to what ever numskull that said..Deus ex doesn't deserve a goty nomination and was no where near as good as the original....you sir a hypocrite and I believe you havn't played Deus ex: HR. Are you really a deus ex fan or you the real troll?...cuz cuz if you are...I know a good place we could hang out under a bridge :)

..nah I just kid

Shralla

21st Nov 2011, 20:34

In fact it doesn't even deserve to be called an RPG (just an action hybrid) or Deus ex for that matter and it is totally a console port, next gen dumb down game.

You sound like a complete retard and there is literally no reason at all for anybody here to take you seriously.

AlexOfSpades

21st Nov 2011, 21:54

Just the fact that you couldnt find the Other Games thread (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=117020), already says a lot about you, OP.

I was going to dissect some posts here and dissolve my rethoric on a pages-long post, but nah, its not going to change sh1t, so imma go play Skyrim.

I mean, as if it would change anything to spend an hour of my time writing an essay about "OP: Your Rights And Wrongs".

Odysseyalien

21st Nov 2011, 22:34

I enjoyed the Witcher 2, would probably like Skyrim, can't wait to start playing Batman Arkham City this week.

However, one point is often missing in the discussion of DXHR. Though set in the future, the game is very relevant to the times we live in today! The "Occupy Wall Street" movement is a mirror of some of the themes of DXHR. We've had (incredibly) sane, non-flaming and intelligent posts about race in the game. The graphics are not the best this year and it has it's flaws like virtually any other triple-A title. But the bottom line is "it's relevant". It makes us think about social issues, rich and poor, the haves and have nots. In my book those are the qualities for film of the year, book of the year, and just about anything in popular culture that makes us take a hard look at ourselves.

I've enjoyed a ton of games this year and I've been more dazzled visually by other games. I've enjoyed the story arc in other games as well. But DXHR is game of the year in my book, whether it wins the popular vote or not.

Rainbow6Team

22nd Nov 2011, 01:57

Why are these two games being compared to?

Elder Scrolls is a medieval fantasy game,Deus Ex is a cyberpunk game.

Doesn't matter which wins goty,as long as it's enjoyable.

OP you sound like a typical fanboy which makes us fans of DX look bad.This topic is a waste of space.

Vasarto

22nd Nov 2011, 03:57

An interesting improvement to the combat mechanics, definitely, however, certain skills were removed/modified/simplified, leading to a less rewarding or engaging character development process.

I know my grammer is crap and the "stupid was uncalled for" I just get over zeleous about many of my favorite franchises so I am sorry but I just wanna tackle this last one before I am done.

Mysticism was pretty much useless and is much more fitting being shuffled around into the others and from what I have seen so far the placement of the old spells in the others seems appropriate enough for me and most others not too care.

Athletics is gone which is good because only an idiot would had wasted one of their seven slots for it. Run faster and slightly improved Stamina during when Stamina didn't really matter enough to make a major significant difference between life and death? Even now its not that big a deal unless your running but still. You can still get along without having the ability to run faster because of the new Run mode they added. Add stamina on it and your fine. I am also sure somewhere there is magical stuff to make you go faster or longer too so why care?

Acrobatics is the only thing I am sad to see go but it was purely for entertainment value only. It served no real purpose only for power leveling really.

As someone whom has actually held a blade and a mace and used them and swung them. The basics are the same. So the whole placement of one and two handed weapons aside from having mace,blade etc. Does make a lot of sense.

The game in no way is simplified. In fact its far more complex than Oblivion is and even though I hated morrowind for its faults. Mainly the slow paced movement and the world overall just did not interest me. It had done a few things right for character development that oblivion simplified itself.

Skyrim just took everything both games did correctly. Dropped two useless skills and took spells from one class that was pretty much useless and shuffled it into the others. After all Mysticism is "magic" so the magic study of magic did not make sense. So now we have Three classes of fighters which is the same as it always has been and each are finally equal. Warrior Classes have six skills, Mage classes have six skills and Rogue now has six skills.

Each which govern their areas of expertise and each are equal and low enough in number that cross skills over them are easy enough to do. Or you could just try to max everything and get everything etc. Or be a mix of all three. Two magic, Two combat and two stealth if you would like and you don't even have to be restricted to six skills.

You can change your mind whenever you want and do whatever you want. BE whom ever you want which is the entire purpose of Elder scrolls. Character creation itself is far more complex than All the other games in terms of how you can make your character look and even though creation of a class is gone. That just opens it up to what Elder scrolls was meant to be in the first place. We have already experienced going where ever we wanted to go and having the ability to do whatever we wanted when we wanted to do it and now finally we have the final lock unchained from the series and that is being whom ever we wanted to be!

No restrictions and complete control over our DNA and human evolution! Does that not sound like the future we were meant to have?

EricaLeeV

22nd Nov 2011, 04:11

You can change your mind whenever you want and do whatever you want. BE whom ever you want which is the entire purpose of Elder scrolls. Character creation itself is far more complex than All the other games in terms of how you can make your character look and even though creation of a class is gone. That just opens it up to what Elder scrolls was meant to be in the first place. We have already experienced going where ever we wanted to go and having the ability to do whatever we wanted when we wanted to do it and now finally we have the final lock unchained from the series and that is being whom ever we wanted to be!

No restrictions and complete control over our DNA and human evolution! Does that not sound like the future we were meant to have?

Not if you don't like that kind of system.

Having the player have complete control over their character poses all kinds of questions on things like a storyline, which usually means the quality suffers for it.

Pros and cons to everything, if you like that kind of freedom then by all means, work with it. Be glad there is a game out there like it that does.

Romeo

22nd Nov 2011, 06:38

I know my grammer is crap and the "stupid was uncalled for" I just get over zeleous about many of my favorite franchises so I am sorry but I just wanna tackle this last one before I am done.

Mysticism was pretty much useless and is much more fitting being shuffled around into the others and from what I have seen so far the placement of the old spells in the others seems appropriate enough for me and most others not too care.

Athletics is gone which is good because only an idiot would had wasted one of their seven slots for it. Run faster and slightly improved Stamina during when Stamina didn't really matter enough to make a major significant difference between life and death? Even now its not that big a deal unless your running but still. You can still get along without having the ability to run faster because of the new Run mode they added. Add stamina on it and your fine. I am also sure somewhere there is magical stuff to make you go faster or longer too so why care?

Acrobatics is the only thing I am sad to see go but it was purely for entertainment value only. It served no real purpose only for power leveling really.

As someone whom has actually held a blade and a mace and used them and swung them. The basics are the same. So the whole placement of one and two handed weapons aside from having mace,blade etc. Does make a lot of sense.

The game in no way is simplified. In fact its far more complex than Oblivion is and even though I hated morrowind for its faults. Mainly the slow paced movement and the world overall just did not interest me. It had done a few things right for character development that oblivion simplified itself.

Skyrim just took everything both games did correctly. Dropped two useless skills and took spells from one class that was pretty much useless and shuffled it into the others. After all Mysticism is "magic" so the magic study of magic did not make sense. So now we have Three classes of fighters which is the same as it always has been and each are finally equal. Warrior Classes have six skills, Mage classes have six skills and Rogue now has six skills.

Each which govern their areas of expertise and each are equal and low enough in number that cross skills over them are easy enough to do. Or you could just try to max everything and get everything etc. Or be a mix of all three. Two magic, Two combat and two stealth if you would like and you don't even have to be restricted to six skills.

You can change your mind whenever you want and do whatever you want. BE whom ever you want which is the entire purpose of Elder scrolls. Character creation itself is far more complex than All the other games in terms of how you can make your character look and even though creation of a class is gone. That just opens it up to what Elder scrolls was meant to be in the first place. We have already experienced going where ever we wanted to go and having the ability to do whatever we wanted when we wanted to do it and now finally we have the final lock unchained from the series and that is being whom ever we wanted to be!

No restrictions and complete control over our DNA and human evolution! Does that not sound like the future we were meant to have?
Mysticism was FAR from useless. If you liked enchantment in the slightest, you needed souls. I used Mysticism more than any other magic talent. Had Enchantment been maintained from Morrowind, we would've had even more use for it.

Athletics was also a useful talent. Now, with improved Hand to Hand, once again, this would be more inspiration to keep the talent, rather than eliminate it.

The game has eliminated attributes. Right off the bat, you cannot deny there's a LARGE simplification right there. Continuing on, the decreased skill pool also contributes to a simpler experience. So too does the retention of the level-scaling, a universally despised feature of Oblivion that was inexplicably re-introduced in Skyrim.

Mysticism doesn't make sense? Ok, ignoring the fact we're talking about god damn magic here (Itself already illogical), Mysticism wasn't about magic. If you took a chance to read the lore, Mysticism was the study of souls, which is why things that detected life, and things that stole souls, were included within it. Actually, further touching upon what makes sense, the previous four games have had Mysticism written in to the lore. Now it has suddenly disappeared... No explanation offered, it rings false immediately.

You could always be who you wanted in the Elder Scrolls series. I don't understand how you could possibly argue otherwise.

chabbles

22nd Nov 2011, 23:47

lmao @ vasarto, relax

i agree with op, deus ex is, if not the best, one of the best games iv played this console gen.
having said that, skyrim is also epic, but the crappy framerate and stuttering im experiencing on ps3 can seem almost gamebreaking at times....

Olgerth Heidern

23rd Nov 2011, 00:11

Mysticism was the school of metamagic (magic that affected other magic), which made it cooler than ten ninjas playing guitars on top of a hill. It covered soul capture, dispels, magicka theft... ways to ef with the opposing caster without killing him outright...

But of course COD kiddies would argue "why would you want to ef with the opposing caster when you can just kill him."

And Bethsoft listened.

Skyrim is a pale shadow of Elder Scrolls. In a way it's actually WORSE than Oblivion, because it took the worst things about Oblivion and made them WORSE. Starting with the interface and melee combat.

This dude sort of nails it, of course he got flamed to death by fanbois, but he tried:

http://forums.bethsoft.com/index.php?/topic/1284221-remember-when/

DXHR might not be everything the original was, but it is INFINITELY more deserving of GOTY than Skyrim.

Vasarto

23rd Nov 2011, 01:17

Skyrim is a pale shadow of Elder Scrolls. In a way it's actually WORSE than Oblivion, because it took the worst things about Oblivion and made them WORSE. Starting with the interface and melee combat.

This dude sort of nails it, of course he got flamed to death by fanbois, but he tried:

http://forums.bethsoft.com/index.php?/topic/1284221-remember-when/

DXHR might not be everything the original was, but it is INFINITELY more deserving of GOTY than Skyrim.

Why is it that in Morrowind that you could swing at something ten times and never hit anything when its right in front of you? Why is it that trying to find something in a menu for your precious morrowind was so infuriating to most players?

Because it was a good step in the first few directions but as a game play experience it suffered too much.

Skyrim took everything morrowind and Oblivion did RIGHT! Like the best possible interface, Animations, and so much more!

BTW the comment on that magic being the study of magic is not my opinion. Mysticism means "magic" and nothing more. They placed the souls and detect life in it because there was no where else for it too go. It is the study of magic and that is the truth quoted per world form the people whom "created the game". Go read online internet interviews with the cast whom made the game and I am sure you will find it eventually. In fact I believe I found it in the first Game Informer that featured skyrim for the first time.

Each type of class has an even amount of skills which means playing ANY kind of character is no better or worst NOR now today does it give more "options" to playing one type of character than the others anymore which is the biggest reason why they had to drop some skills that they and many of the others saw as either pointless or could just be thought up of as the same thing as another.

Athletics was useless because all it is Stamina. Anything related to what Stamina or perks for "other skills" having a good athletics could have could have and DID get placed in the actual skill itself as a perk you can choose.

Third person is much better "accept horses not being first person anymore"

Skyrim is the BEST Elder scroll game since Daggerfall!
It still has many faults but when Elder Scrolls VI:Blackmarsh arrives it will once again take everything this game did correctly and make it better and leave out the crap. Just like Skyrim did to Oblivion and Oblivion did to morrowind.

itsonyourhead

23rd Nov 2011, 03:15

Why is it that in Morrowind that you could swing at something ten times and never hit anything when its right in front of you? Why is it that trying to find something in a menu for your precious morrowind was so infuriating to most players?

Because it was a good step in the first few directions but as a game play experience it suffered too much.

Skyrim took everything morrowind and Oblivion did RIGHT! Like the best possible interface, Animations, and so much more!

BTW the comment on that magic being the study of magic is not my opinion. Mysticism means "magic" and nothing more. They placed the souls and detect life in it because there was no where else for it too go. It is the study of magic and that is the truth quoted per world form the people whom "created the game". Go read online internet interviews with the cast whom made the game and I am sure you will find it eventually. In fact I believe I found it in the first Game Informer that featured skyrim for the first time.

Each type of class has an even amount of skills which means playing ANY kind of character is no better or worst NOR now today does it give more "options" to playing one type of character than the others anymore which is the biggest reason why they had to drop some skills that they and many of the others saw as either pointless or could just be thought up of as the same thing as another.

Athletics was useless because all it is Stamina. Anything related to what Stamina or perks for "other skills" having a good athletics could have could have and DID get placed in the actual skill itself as a perk you can choose.

Third person is much better "accept horses not being first person anymore"

Skyrim is the BEST Elder scroll game since Daggerfall!
It still has many faults but when Elder Scrolls VI:Blackmarsh arrives it will once again take everything this game did correctly and make it better and leave out the crap. Just like Skyrim did to Oblivion and Oblivion did to morrowind.

Actually, when it comes down to it: here is the truth about Skyrim.

There were many many things that didn't make sense/sucked about Morrowind's combat, stealth, and other gameplay mechanics. However, that didn't matter. That's not why people fell in love with The Elder Scrolls. The existing fanbase fell in love with The Elder Scrolls for it's amazingly expansive and deep world, lore, and role-playing elements.

Todd and Bethesda have been marginally improving on combat, stealth, etc. while losing sight of what made people love The Elder Scrolls to begin with.

I firmly believe that had Todd et al put as much or more effort into refining, expanding, and deepening the lore, simulative, and role-playing elements, that The Elder Scrolls would be a mind-blowingly amazing game today.

Romeo

23rd Nov 2011, 04:38

Why is it that in Morrowind that you could swing at something ten times and never hit anything when its right in front of you? Why is it that trying to find something in a menu for your precious morrowind was so infuriating to most players?

Because it was a good step in the first few directions but as a game play experience it suffered too much.

Skyrim took everything morrowind and Oblivion did RIGHT! Like the best possible interface, Animations, and so much more!

BTW the comment on that magic being the study of magic is not my opinion. Mysticism means "magic" and nothing more. They placed the souls and detect life in it because there was no where else for it too go. It is the study of magic and that is the truth quoted per world form the people whom "created the game". Go read online internet interviews with the cast whom made the game and I am sure you will find it eventually. In fact I believe I found it in the first Game Informer that featured skyrim for the first time.

Each type of class has an even amount of skills which means playing ANY kind of character is no better or worst NOR now today does it give more "options" to playing one type of character than the others anymore which is the biggest reason why they had to drop some skills that they and many of the others saw as either pointless or could just be thought up of as the same thing as another.

Athletics was useless because all it is Stamina. Anything related to what Stamina or perks for "other skills" having a good athletics could have could have and DID get placed in the actual skill itself as a perk you can choose.

Third person is much better "accept horses not being first person anymore"

Skyrim is the BEST Elder scroll game since Daggerfall!
It still has many faults but when Elder Scrolls VI:Blackmarsh arrives it will once again take everything this game did correctly and make it better and leave out the crap. Just like Skyrim did to Oblivion and Oblivion did to morrowind.
Because they didn't have enough technology available to show the enemy dodging your strikes, which is why you would miss (It was your argility versus your opponent's). It wasn't that your blade was passing through your opponent, it's that they were simply moving out of the way (According to lore anyways, not in the presentation). As to the menu, I guess for console players it may have been, but for PC players, I had absolutely zero issue. The opposite now holds true for the game.

As someone else said, Skyrim took much of what was worse about Oblivion and amplified those issues. I actually struggle to find much that Oblivion did better, save for improved graphics and animations (At the expense of an interest environment and aesthetic).

It is your opinion, because once again, the lore quite clearly states what Mysticism is (http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Mysticism). You can pretend to ignore it all you want, but as I said, the previous four games have all talked about the schools of magic, Mysticism being one. Now it's just suddenly missing in Skyrim.

You realize, of course, that Morrowind and Oblivion both had an even amount of skills in each group too, right? Also, it should be noted that Athletics was not just Stamina (In fact, Stamina was the sum of Agility, Endurance, Willpower and Strength (http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Attributes); Athletics wasn't even a factor). I'm beginning to get the impression you haven't actually played any previous entry in the series, have you?

Daggerfall, while good, was far from the best. Morrowind improved upon in most areas. Hell, even the let-down that was Oblivion exceeded it in most player's opinions.

The fact you just said Oblivion was an improvement to Morrowind all-but-confirms my suspicion about your experience with the series.

xaduha

23rd Nov 2011, 11:43

Skyrim and DX:HR are "good enough". Oblivion and DX:IW were not. I don't care about GOTY.

VectorM

23rd Nov 2011, 13:51

It is your opinion, because once again, the lore quite clearly states what Mysticism is (http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Mysticism). You can pretend to ignore it all you want, but as I said, the previous four games have all talked about the schools of magic, Mysticism being one. Now it's just suddenly missing in Skyrim.

It's still in the lore, it's just not presented separately as it's own skill. The same way you obviously have blacksmiths that repair stuff, even thought that's no longer a skill.

I firmly believe that had Todd et al put as much or more effort into refining, expanding, and deepening the lore, simulative, and role-playing elements, that The Elder Scrolls would be a mind-blowingly amazing game today.

Mindblowingly amazing to who?

ZakKa89

23rd Nov 2011, 15:31

Skyrim is amazing

DEHR has better voice acting and main story though.

kelticfury

23rd Nov 2011, 15:57

The OP never played on master if he thinks its too easy. You get killed in 5 seconds flat if you are playing master diff with no cheats. You have to plan ahead, do a lot of running away etc, just to survive a bandit attack until you are levelled/skilled/equipped up a bit. Granted, I play a mage, so its a rough road. But yeah, I doubt that brand new account that posted this thread is much more than a troll.

Edit: Also there is no reason to compare Skyrim and DXHR, I love both games.

Edit:
Now with the FPS game's like CoD/MW3/BF3 they have the same list but change at the "Over simplification" or "Money Gainer". They split off to go for all money (MW3 and BF3) or just keep making the same game over with new stuff (Call of Duty series). But this is my opinion and I don't care what you think about what game.

Edit:
Now with the FPS game's like CoD/MW3/BF3 they have the same list but change at the "Over simplification" or "Money Gainer". They split off to go for all money (MW3 and BF3) or just keep making the same game over with new stuff (Call of Duty series). But this is my opinion and I don't care what you think about what game.

If you can make a better list then I will submit to your opinion.

I'm sorry, but I don't see that at all. You are obviously quite mad. There is so much wrong with what you said I don't know where to start.

First of all, how the hell do you miss-spell origin?

Second, DA:O is rather light for a "hard-core" RPG.

Third, big publishers push sequels to successful games for cash. This is known.

Fourth, Skyrim is not perfect. Neither is Halo 4.

Romeo

23rd Nov 2011, 19:33

It's still in the lore, it's just not presented separately as it's own skill. The same way you obviously have blacksmiths that repair stuff, even thought that's no longer a skill.

Mindblowingly amazing to who?
The problem being that the schools of magic were clearly defined and seperated. Being extremely talented at Destruction, for example, would not assist you in your attempts at Restoration. That also holds true for Mysticism - perhaps even more so, as the lore calls it the most difficult of all schools to learn. According to the previous four games, Mysticism and Alteration have no more in common than Heavy Armor and Swords would: Sure, they're both in the same group (Magic and Combat respectively), but ultimately they are unique skills.

Indeed, the Elder Scrolls has never been the best story-telling experience, but I always liked being able to go through the story as I liked. Dagoth Ur threatens to wipe out everyone? OOOHHH, A BULL NETCH. Daedra are invading Cryodil? HOLY CRAP, A UNICORN. Dragons coming to bring Ragnorok? OH MAN, YETI TIME.

Edit:
Now with the FPS game's like CoD/MW3/BF3 they have the same list but change at the "Over simplification" or "Money Gainer". They split off to go for all money (MW3 and BF3) or just keep making the same game over with new stuff (Call of Duty series). But this is my opinion and I don't care what you think about what game.

If you can make a better list then I will submit to your opinion.
Personally, I'd have Dragon Age II down in the over-simplification, as I would Skyrim and Halo 3. And Daggerfall wasn't much of a money-maker, to be honest. Good game, just didn't sell as well as the next three would. Anyways, I find it hard to continue sticking up for the industry when it refuses to cater to anyone but the casual audience. Dark Souls, Starcraft II and Witcher II were the only games in the last couple of years that haven't sacrificed the hardcore crowd and have stuck to their guns. I cannot help but feel we've come from the era of art (Our Citizen Kane, if you will) into the era of industry, and I feel it's really hurt the games themselves. The same holds true for pretty much every art form. Detroit in the 60's were making excessive, fun and ultimately unique vehicles; Today almost none of them are still doing the stupid fun things any more, because the profit margins aren't large enough. That means dull things like Fusions, Chargers and Malibus survive, while art forms like the Ford GT and Dodge Viper are lost, and the Corvette becomes increasingly more expensive to create.

VectorM

23rd Nov 2011, 19:40

"Appeal to Art" should be an official fallacy, IMHO. :D

Romeo

23rd Nov 2011, 19:45

"Appeal to Art" should be an official fallacy, IMHO. :D
I know, but it took cinema how many years to devolve into the explosion fest that it is now? (And even then, it should be noted slower paced narratives are still fairly easy to come by.)

Games, on the other hand, have not only fallen faster (Taking approximately ten years versus film's seventy or so), but have fallen MUCH harder (Every game these days feels like it was designed by Micheal Bay).

Zoet

23rd Nov 2011, 22:20

I know, but it took cinema how many years to devolve into the explosion fest that it is now? (And even then, it should be noted slower paced narratives are still fairly easy to come by.)

Games, on the other hand, have not only fallen faster (Taking approximately ten years versus film's seventy or so), but have fallen MUCH harder (Every game these days feels like it was designed by Micheal Bay).

Well, I would actually say that games aren't as universally nasty as mainstream cinema, and Transformers 3 was just about one of the most awful things I've ever seen, but that might just be because I choose my games wisely, whereas I'll watch many movies just for the hell of it. DX:HR was actually more enjoyable for me than any new release movie I've seen this year. I've become more 'into games' I think as a result of my disillusionment with movies.

Skyrim vs DX:HR? I haven't played Skyrim yet, but everything just comes down to personal preference: I love Bethesda open word RPGs, but I generally dislike high fantasy; so that is a stumbling block that I will have to get past. DX:HR on the other hand ticked all of the right genre boxes for me. There was no way I couldn't love it.

Romeo

23rd Nov 2011, 23:12

Well, I would actually say that games aren't as universally nasty as mainstream cinema, and Transformers 3 was just about one of the most awful things I've ever seen, but that might just be because I choose my games wisely, whereas I'll watch many movies just for the hell of it. DX:HR was actually more enjoyable for me than any new release movie I've seen this year. I've become more 'into games' I think as a result of my disillusionment with movies.

Skyrim vs DX:HR? I haven't played Skyrim yet, but everything just comes down to personal preference: I love Bethesda open word RPGs, but I generally dislike high fantasy; so that is a stumbling block that I will have to get past. DX:HR on the other hand ticked all of the right genre boxes for me. There was no way I couldn't love it.
Ah, see I feel the opposite. At least cinema, as mindless as some of it is, at least attempts to differentiate itself on occasion. Right now on the movie channel there's Moon, How to Train Your Dragon, Limitless, Battle: Los Angeles and Insidious. Now, those are just the five that caught my eye, but they're all rather distinct from one another. In theatres we have the Ides of March and J. Edgar in stark contrast to the special effects abomination you mentioned. Hell, even Drive was something completely unexpected (Last movie I went to). Sure, the market is still generally ran by comedies and action movies, but there's still ample opportunity to see unique things - even when sticking to the mainstream.

In stark contrast, mainstream gaming seems to have stopped the creative presses. Regenerating health plagues quite literally every modern shooter. Cover systems are being shoved in to games where they aren't needed. Stealth shooters and tactical shooters are being brushed aside to make way for Call of Duty style arcade combat. The problem isn't limited to shooters either, every genre is busy mimicking their competition. Complex RTS games like Supreme Commander were dumbed down so that someone raised on fast-paced games could adapt. Command and Conquer sold off it's identity to try and fit in with the competition. On the RPG front, we have games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age and Morrowind that are abandonning most of their complexity so those without the attention span to manage stats can play the game, and the results are unsettling: Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age 2 and Oblivion. Hell, even my beloved racing games are not immune. Forza Motorsport, itself a simulation racing game had several new features... Almost all of which were geared towards attracting the casual market. In the worst case example, you have something like Need for Speed: Shift, which wants to be a sim, but can't bring itself to step away from the casual market, which leaves it in a sad state of bipolarism between arcade and sim. The result is something more frustrating than either, as the car goes from perfect traction to no traction without any sort of consistency.

Skyrim is similar to Oblivion in the sense it is the "standard" high fantasy type (Magic, Dragons, Elves, etc). If you don't like high fantasy, it's going to be hard for you to step in to the lore. The gameplay, while I personally believe it to be inferior to Morrowind before it, is still rather fun if you're the kind of gamer who enjoys choosing what to do. Like Oblivion was, and Morrowind before it, it's completely possible just to wander aimlessly and do whatever you like without even having to deal with the main story, if you so choose. I guess long story short: If your favourite part of Deus Ex was the hub-cities, you'll probably enjoy it. If your favourite part of Deus Ex was the missions, you probably wont.

Zoet

24th Nov 2011, 01:03

@ Romeo: I was of course exaggerating, but I haven't seen a new mainstream movie in a while that has captured my imagination. I've only got into games with this console generation, so I'm not jaded and bitter about games yet, as I need something enterainment-related to be optimistic about! :p
I will be playing Skyrim for certain, but for the loot and the exploration, not for the story and lore.

Romeo

24th Nov 2011, 01:44

@ Romeo: I was of course exaggerating, but I haven't seen a new mainstream movie in a while that has captured my imagination. I've only got into games with this console generation, so I'm not jaded and bitter about games yet, as I need something enterainment-related to be optimistic about! :p
I will be playing Skyrim for certain, but for the loot and the exploration, not for the story and lore.
You didn't enjoy Moon? I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I must admit different strokes and all that. And yes, if you just got in to gaming, you might not realize the fall from grace that has plagued it (Didn't mean to come across dismissive at all). I think that's why most people enjoy it, the Elder Scrolls has never been huge on story.

68_pie

24th Nov 2011, 11:09

You didn't enjoy Moon? I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I must admit different strokes and all that.

I probably wouldn't count Moon as mainstream (based on the number of my friends who haven't seen it, the heathens). Inception maybe? I don't think it was as clever as it thinks it is but it was engaging and provoked discussion.

VectorM

24th Nov 2011, 12:54

The problem being that the schools of magic were clearly defined and seperated. Being extremely talented at Destruction, for example, would not assist you in your attempts at Restoration. That also holds true for Mysticism - perhaps even more so, as the lore calls it the most difficult of all schools to learn. According to the previous four games, Mysticism and Alteration have no more in common than Heavy Armor and Swords would: Sure, they're both in the same group (Magic and Combat respectively), but ultimately they are unique skills.

As far as I know, they are still clearly separated, IN THE LORE. Just not in their playable representation in Skyrim.

I know, but it took cinema how many years to devolve into the explosion fest that it is now?

And how did you come to this conclusion? You've seen and reviewed the vast majority of movies on the market?

And call me semantical, but there is no such thing as devolution.

In theatres we have the Ides of March and J. Edgar in stark contrast to the special effects abomination you mentioned. Hell, even Drive was something completely unexpected (Last movie I went to). Sure, the market is still generally ran by comedies and action movies, but there's still ample opportunity to see unique things - even when sticking to the mainstream.

Drive and a lot of other great movies, that were out in the recent years, are simply not mainstream and are not supposed to be.

Same thing with video games today. Yeah, you have your Mass Effects and whatever, but then you have Orcs Must Die, Amnesia, Minecraft (a game that was never supposed to be anything big, yet it became a classic before it was even officially out! What recent movie did the same?), Portal, etc.

kelticfury

24th Nov 2011, 15:34

I can see the vague connection between two completely different forms of entertainment, but trying to draw conclusions about one based on the other is a monstrously huge leap. A leap that I am not going to make.

Romeo

24th Nov 2011, 20:45

As far as I know, they are still clearly separated, IN THE LORE. Just not in their playable representation in Skyrim.

And how did you come to this conclusion? You've seen and reviewed the vast majority of movies on the market?

And call me semantical, but there is no such thing as devolution.

Drive and a lot of other great movies, that were out in the recent years, are simply not mainstream and are not supposed to be.

Same thing with video games today. Yeah, you have your Mass Effects and whatever, but then you have Orcs Must Die, Amnesia, Minecraft (a game that was never supposed to be anything big, yet it became a classic before it was even officially out! What recent movie did the same?), Portal, etc.
Nah, they aren't still counted in the lore as belonging to a seperate school. It's not mentioned one way or the other, but the simple fact is, the lore previously stated (As I said) that in order to get good at Mysticism, you'd have to practice... Mysticism.

I came to this conclusion by watching most of the movies I can. I count mainstream as anything released in the major theatres. If I have to put in an effort to find it, I consider that the threshold between mainstream and indy. And many of the films in theatres these days seem to be geared towards action, or a kill-me-now brand of comedy.

Drive was still a major Hollywood release. To give it such unique styling was a massive risk. It'd be akin to Halo 4 suddenly abandonning "normal" concepts and trying their own thing. Possible? Yes. Likely? I'd bet my life that they don't. As for the others, quite literally NONE of those are full, release games (Save for Portal's sequel - which had already proven itself to be a safe bet). One cannot walk in to EB Games/Gamestop and pick up Orcs Must Die. It isn't being designed around bleeding edge tech. It's small, and it's doomed to stay small as a result. Understand here, I am not dismissive of games as an art form - indy games routinely do unique and interesting things. Hell, even flash games occasionally cater to the hardcore, or do something unique. And I will concede I know a few games (Granted, less than I can count on one hand) that didn't make huge concessions to the casual/mainstream market. But overall, the point still stands that games seem to be stuck in this ideal that what fans want is exactly the same as everyone else.

Shralla

25th Nov 2011, 02:11

I can see the vague connection between two completely different forms of entertainment, but trying to draw conclusions about one based on the other is a monstrously huge leap. A leap that I am not going to make.

Except that all forms of media follow the exact same pattern. Twilight is the same as Call of Duty, which is the same as The Fast and the Furious. Most things suck. That's just how it goes. The "general public" is stupid, and will eat up anything that's shoved down their throat, as long as it doesn't take too much thought or effort, and maintains a constant source of direct stimulation as to not bore the audience, and as such the vast majority of content out there is garbage. Romeo absolutely has a point when he talks about how fast video games have fallen into the same trap that movies did over a much longer period, but the reason that it happened so fast is because of the era in which it first came out. By the time video games were invented, mass media had long since taken hold of society, whereas books, music, and film all existed before there was such a thing as "mass media," hence the process taking longer.

You make the most money by appealing to the broadest possible audience, which in turn means that your product is going to suffer in quality. There are obviously exceptions to this rule, but like I said, those are exceptions.

Fireplay

25th Nov 2011, 03:15

I'm sorry, but I don't see that at all. You are obviously quite mad. There is so much wrong with what you said I don't know where to start.

First of all, how the hell do you miss-spell origin?

Second, DA:O is rather light for a "hard-core" RPG.

Third, big publishers push sequels to successful games for cash. This is known.

Fourth, Skyrim is not perfect. Neither is Halo 4.

1. I said i couldn't remember how to spell it and i was too lazy at the time to look it up.
2. i'm saying it's rather hardcore when you compare it to skyrim and oblivion as that is what we are talking about right?
3. I never said they didn't, I just implied that there is one game where they truly try to cash in on the game. 4.Skyrim?<---- Question mark implies that i am not sure. Also Halo 4 is not out yet and and won't be for another few years.

You are obviously quite mad.
Yes... Yes I am, but are we not all mad in our own special way?:)

Agent Denton

25th Nov 2011, 15:33

With other more commercially successful titles like MW 3 and Battlefield 3 hell even Batman, it will be a tough run. Not saying it doesn't deserve it but damn if it can get past those monsters. lol.

Romeo

25th Nov 2011, 15:45

Despite their sales, I truly expect neither Modern Warfare nor Battlefield to win GOTY. Modern Warfare is a commercial juggernaut, to be sure, but it certainly doesn't do anything new or incredible. Battlefield is too busy trying to play copycat to have any hope in hell. Skyrim to me personally also doesn't deserve it: I felt for every step forward, there was always at least something else I felt was a step back.

Shralla

25th Nov 2011, 20:14

Battlefield is too busy trying to play copycat to have any hope in hell.

People keep saying that, and they keep being ENTIRELY WRONG. Absolutely nothing in BF3 feels like they're trying to copy Call of Duty at all. The core gameplay is fundamentally different in every capacity other than "it's in first-person, and you shoot things with iron sights." How people think they're trying to be Call of Duty is completely beyond me, when Call of Duty has no recoil on any gun, hitscan, tiny static arenas, and nothing but DM modes. Battlefield is literally the complete opposite of all of that, with crazy amounts of recoil that require significant management on the part of the player, bullet travel time, bullet drop, and distance damage drop-off, huge maps that can be almost completely blown away, and a complete focus on objective-based modes.

Ashpolt

25th Nov 2011, 21:36

People keep saying that, and they keep being ENTIRELY WRONG. Absolutely nothing in BF3 feels like they're trying to copy Call of Duty at all. The core gameplay is fundamentally different in every capacity other than "it's in first-person, and you shoot things with iron sights." How people think they're trying to be Call of Duty is completely beyond me, when Call of Duty has no recoil on any gun, hitscan, tiny static arenas, and nothing but DM modes. Battlefield is literally the complete opposite of all of that, with crazy amounts of recoil that require significant management on the part of the player, bullet travel time, bullet drop, and distance damage drop-off, huge maps that can be almost completely blown away, and a complete focus on objective-based modes.

To be fair, the single player campaign clearly aims at providing a CoD-like experience. But criticising BF for its singleplayer is ridiculous. As you say, the multiplayer is massively different, and more importantly, follows a template which predates the Call of Duty series.

ZakKa89

25th Nov 2011, 22:33

modern warfare 3 will win GOTY at the stupid spike VGA's. I believe black ops won last year. It's a shame really.

Romeo

26th Nov 2011, 02:14

People keep saying that, and they keep being ENTIRELY WRONG. Absolutely nothing in BF3 feels like they're trying to copy Call of Duty at all. The core gameplay is fundamentally different in every capacity other than "it's in first-person, and you shoot things with iron sights." How people think they're trying to be Call of Duty is completely beyond me, when Call of Duty has no recoil on any gun, hitscan, tiny static arenas, and nothing but DM modes. Battlefield is literally the complete opposite of all of that, with crazy amounts of recoil that require significant management on the part of the player, bullet travel time, bullet drop, and distance damage drop-off, huge maps that can be almost completely blown away, and a complete focus on objective-based modes.
Regenerating health (Thus damaging the biggest point of the Support class), way faster pace online, single player is a perfect mirror (If a little bit better story). Before I even played through the story, one of the first thoughts to go through my head was how much it felt like most shooters these days: Me-too games.

FreedomForever

26th Nov 2011, 10:38

SKyrim is overated.....For me, it feels too much like oblivion, it just doesn't have that revolutionary feel I got when I played morrowind or oblivion.

Perhaps I grown accustom to the freedom but Skyrim is a good game

Having said that...Deus ex HR is not even close to Deus ex 1....I don't think it deserves to be game of the year, the story line wasn't that great, I mean it was looking for that chick for most of the time then finding tidbits here and there...finally everything is revealed.

I like Deus Ex style better, you felt more immerse and it gave you info the consparicy asap so it stayed interesting from the get go....I like consparicies not some guy looking for a loved one story.

Anyways Im not sure what is game of the year...I havn't really played alot of the new games but I don't think skyrime or Deus ex HR are revolutionary

VectorM

26th Nov 2011, 11:23

Sigh.

Game of the Year means, that a game is considered the best COMPARED TO OTHER GAMES IN THAT SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD. The game could be one of the most generic things to have ever been released, but as long as it's still better than the other generic stuff, it's a game of the year.

So I don't understand how that Deus Ex 1 comparison makes sense in this context.

ⓣⓐⓕⓕⓔⓡ

26th Nov 2011, 13:52

Because your stupid

I lol'ed :lol:

Romeo

26th Nov 2011, 19:06

SKyrim is overated.....For me, it feels too much like oblivion, it just doesn't have that revolutionary feel I got when I played morrowind or oblivion.

Perhaps I grown accustom to the freedom but Skyrim is a good game

Having said that...Deus ex HR is not even close to Deus ex 1....I don't think it deserves to be game of the year, the story line wasn't that great, I mean it was looking for that chick for most of the time then finding tidbits here and there...finally everything is revealed.

I like Deus Ex style better, you felt more immerse and it gave you info the consparicy asap so it stayed interesting from the get go....I like consparicies not some guy looking for a loved one story.

Anyways Im not sure what is game of the year...I havn't really played alot of the new games but I don't think skyrime or Deus ex HR are revolutionary
Your name is FreedomForever, I'd hope you've grown accustomed to freedom... You've got quite a while left with it. :D

As to your points:

Completely agree with you. First time I played Morrowind, everything was awe-inspiring. Getting off the boat and soaking up the city was amazing. Venturing through and seeing all the people was awesome. Looking at the silt strider demonstrated how bizarre the life could get. Seeing your first dwarven automatons was a unique experience. The cities all felt completely original. Watching a Netch drift lazily through the landscape, with it pausing ever-so-briefly to inspect a vibrant purple tree, and you realize how incredibly unique EVERY part of the world was. To me, nothing in Oblivion or Skyrim have had the same effect - it all feels like by-the-numbers fantasy. And certainly, nothing has even come close to how amazing it was to stumble on to the floating city of Vivic the first time.

As someone else said though, as disappointing as some things were in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, GOTY doesn't depend on it's status versus the original (Otherwise a new IP would never have the ability to win!); It revolves around that game versus everything else that year. And despite how much I love the Elder Scrolls, Skyrim constantly left a bitter taste in my mouth as missed potential, Human Revolution though felt like it rose above many of the decisions I found myself lamenting. I'm not sure if I'd go so far as to call it Game of the Year either (For example, Forza 4 is in every concievable way a better experience to me, even though I know it wont win GOTY). I'm still waiting to see what happens. I have little doubt it'll be a MW3 vs BF3 battle, even though neither of them deserve it in my books.

I don't know, I love the original Deus Ex story, but then I also loved Human Revolution's story (Granted, I also loved Invisible War's story, so take that with a grain of salt). And, once again, if we're comparing stories to the games that came out this year, Human Revolution stands out as one of the best, in my opinion.

Like I said, in my perfect world, Forza 4 would be taking game of the year and racing game of the year, as it simply evolved all the previous concepts and improved upon them - that's what a sequel should do in my books. It didn't completely re-write itself (Command and Conquer 4, Mass Effect II), and it didn't dumb itself down (Oblivion, Dragon Age II). Shooter of the year would go to Human Revolution (Even though is does have that blasphemous health system, it at least feels different from every other shooter this year). RPG would go to Dark Souls (Complex, cruel and different). RTS would be won by the Retribution stand-alone expansion to Dawn of War II ($30 when it first came out, and even without the previous games, has six campaigns, tons of items/weapons/armor and good multiplayer). I don't play platformers/action games/adventure games enough to warrant an opinion on them.

singularity

29th Nov 2011, 23:34

I'm sure I'm about to be lynched for this, knowing this community, but I have to say it. For me, dumbing down TES Skyrim made me the happiest I've been in a long time - simply because they removed the tedium that caused me to put down Morrowind after 70 hours of play-time (and caused me to not even bother playing Oblivion). More consistent magic and weapon attacks, fast travel, no major/ minor skills and armor and weapons that don't degrade all did a lot to make a 70 hour game feel like a 70 hour game, as opposed to Morrowind, where they made a 70 hour game take 140 hours.
Obviously I'm not a hardcore TES fan -- and I know those who have been with the series since Arena and Daggerfall are (understandably) hurt and alienated by TES being dumbed down on an incrimental basis -- much the same way I felt hurt and alienated with DXIW and DXHR taking certain design liberties.

With Skyrim, I feel they took the core design of what makes TES appealing and removed the more "hardcore" buy in price of asking you to swing a sword 100 times for every hit, deal with armor that constantly degrades, and spend at least 1/3 of your entire in-game experience walking somewhere. And they did this while making an RPG that still has more content, more complexity and more style than a majority of the other games on the market. Morrowind wasn't a great game because of these more tedious design emelemnts. More realistic, more complex and more old-school, without a doubt, but realism, complexity and nostalgia, simply for the sake of them, do not a good game create. I always believed Morrowind was great because if filled you with awe, offered enough freedom to truely make your head spin and grabbed you in its world. Skyrim does all of the above, just as well. I think it deserves it's praise (just as DXHR does). I think Bethesda has hit a sweet spot, where they have trimmed off a lot of the fat from their game, while leaving everything important intact, and selling it in a package that both old and new fans can enjoy, at least to some degree. Not many games pull that off.

With DXHR, I realized the core DX experience has very little to do with how your health regenerates, how you take cover, or when the game takes place, but rather in its freedom of choice and level of engrossment. I think a lot of TES players are slowly (but surely) starting to realize the same thing with Skyrim.

With that said, The Witcher 2 wins game of the year. I didn't even think that was open for debate.

TrickyVein

29th Nov 2011, 23:46

Singularity, I agree with much of what you said about Skyrim.

I don't have a leg to stand on because I haven't played any of the other Elder Scrolls, but I feel like there's enough there to sustain a high level of enjoyable gameplay. I was thinking to myself "wouldn't it add a new dimension to the gameplay to have to manage the condition of your arms and armor?" and "shouldn't there be more character-based sill management and not only health, stamina and magica?" and honestly I don't know. Once the creation kit is released I hope me or someone else can try these things out but for now I'm pretty satisfied with it.

So far my experience in DX:HR has probably been tainted by the leak. I thought that all of the readily available weapon modifications and the rate at which you can acquire praxis kits and upgrade your augmentations were for the demo-purposes only. It turns out that hasn't changed and that is disappointing. I'll have to finish it though.

Romeo

30th Nov 2011, 00:01

With that said, The Witcher 2 wins game of the year. I didn't even think that was open for debate.
If the industry was just it would. Problem I see is that Witcher 2 isn't in enough households to have a large enough fanbase for votes. When it comes to RPGs, I think Skyrim is the only one with a snowball's chance in hell. That being said, Modern Warfare (Through sheer player count) or Battlefield (Through excessive loyalty) will both likely destroy anything else, which is a shame, because both were a let down in my books.

itsonyourhead

30th Nov 2011, 01:02

I'm sure I'm about to be lynched for this, knowing this community, but I have to say it. For me, dumbing down TES Skyrim made me the happiest I've been in a long time - simply because they removed the tedium that caused me to put down Morrowind after 70 hours of play-time (and caused me to not even bother playing Oblivion). More consistent magic and weapon attacks, fast travel, no major/ minor skills and armor and weapons that don't degrade all did a lot to make a 70 hour game feel like a 70 hour game, as opposed to Morrowind, where they made a 70 hour game take 140 hours.
Obviously I'm not a hardcore TES fan -- and I know those who have been with the series since Arena and Daggerfall are (understandably) hurt and alienated by TES being dumbed down on an incrimental basis -- much the same way I felt hurt and alienated with DXIW and DXHR taking certain design liberties.

With Skyrim, I feel they took the core design of what makes TES appealing and removed the more "hardcore" buy in price of asking you to swing a sword 100 times for every hit, deal with armor that constantly degrades, and spend at least 1/3 of your entire in-game experience walking somewhere. And they did this while making an RPG that still has more content, more complexity and more style than a majority of the other games on the market. Morrowind wasn't a great game because of these more tedious design emelemnts. More realistic, more complex and more old-school, without a doubt, but realism, complexity and nostalgia, simply for the sake of them, do not a good game create. I always believed Morrowind was great because if filled you with awe, offered enough freedom to truely make your head spin and grabbed you in its world. Skyrim does all of the above, just as well. I think it deserves it's praise (just as DXHR does). I think Bethesda has hit a sweet spot, where they have trimmed off a lot of the fat from their game, while leaving everything important intact, and selling it in a package that both old and new fans can enjoy, at least to some degree. Not many games pull that off.

With that said, The Witcher 2 wins game of the year. I didn't even think that was open for debate.

I have to agree and disagree with you. While the game is still enjoyable, it is nowhere as meaningful.

To refute your love of "fast travel". -- There were ways of getting around the "fast-travel" in Morrowind. There was lots of transportation; boats, silt striders, and teleportation (both guild, mark and recall, and divine and almsivi intervention). And if that doesn't get your everywhere, there was the spell feather, jump, and slowfall. And, my personal favorite, levitation (steel blade of heaven) + boots of blinding speed. There were also many scrolls of "wind", which make you invisible, levitate, and extremely fast. If you leveled your acrobatics and athletics and speed, you moved pretty fast. Also, Morrowind wasn't that big. It really wasn't. It took no more than 2 minutes to get anywhere from a fast travel point. The setting is amazing, and immersing yourself in the world during a short walk is just icing on the cake. <-- The point is, that Morrowind kept you in the game world and simulation constantly.

Spell casting was so much more rewarding in Morrowind. You can buy that spell that's way too hard for your character, and you might be able to cast it. But you might fail (which is realistic). The game didn't hold your hand. It let you explore and discover and try. There were SO MANY MORE spells in Morrowind than in Oblivion, and they were all useful. What was even more rewarding is that the spells weren't solely geared towards combat. The way I played Morrowind, I did as little dungeon delving as possible. That's why, as Todd et al decided to focus the game more and more on dungeon delving, that I liked it less and less.

Did Skyrim still have the possibility of providing a rich and rewarding experience? Yes. I think so. Lamenting the loss of so much imaginative involvement. But IT DIDN'T. And that is the most important point. Had they actually provided a truly remarkable experience, it would be okay. But they didn't. And it just fails for that.

Zoet

30th Nov 2011, 01:19

I've just started Skyrim, and I know I'll enjoy it, as I do all Bethesda RPGs, but I must say that it is feeling depressingly like Oblivion. I am happy though that I was fairly successful in re-creating LOTR's Faramir for myself and Aragorn for my brother, continuing my trend of picking a fictional character from another work to play as in Bethesda games; even though the hair-styles offered by the character creator are dreadful.
DX:HR is still my game of the year. It works for me on so many counts that I swear it could have been made for me.

Vasarto

30th Nov 2011, 01:21

I hope Okamiden wins....how bout that eh? Or skyward sword. Know what would be really sad? What if Robot unicorn attack heavy metal edition won eh?

...or did that one come out last year?

cant remember..BUT it would be funny if it did.

imported_BoB_

30th Nov 2011, 01:37

To be fair, the single player campaign clearly aims at providing a CoD-like experience. But criticising BF for its singleplayer is ridiculous. As you say, the multiplayer is massively different, and more importantly, follows a template which predates the Call of Duty series.

Well, not really, nobody asked them to put it in in the first place. They put it to compete with CoD, it's only logical to compare them then.

If the industry was just it would. Problem I see is that Witcher 2 isn't in enough households to have a large enough fanbase for votes. When it comes to RPGs, I think Skyrim is the only one with a snowball's chance in hell. That being said, Modern Warfare (Through sheer player count) or Battlefield (Through excessive loyalty) will both likely destroy anything else, which is a shame, because both were a let down in my books.

IMO, there is very little chance that an exclusive wins GOTY this year with the big year that was, so it rules out Zelda, The Witcher 2, Forza 4, Uncharted 3 and Gears of War 3. Not much left besides Batman, Skyrim and Portal 2 then. Human Revolution is already history being released before all the big AAA titles, it doesn't stand out much anymore in people's mind if they don't look back to the full year (I know it's supposed to be GOTY, but we all know how journalism/industry work at this point)

In a fair competition, no Bethesda game would be ever allowed in the first place because of the beta version they release and (most importantly) never fix.

Shralla

30th Nov 2011, 01:45

Regenerating health (Thus damaging the biggest point of the Support class), way faster pace online

Regenerating health takes so long to kick in and and regenerates so slowly that unless you're damaged while hoofing it from point to point, there's almost no chance that it will have any effect on combat outcomes by the time you find yourself near a medkit, which are still way more important than sitting around like an idiot waiting for your health to come back.

Faster-paced is just wrong, and based on what you seem to THINK the regenerating health is like, I don't think you've even played it.

Well, not really, nobody asked them to put it in in the first place. They put it to compete with CoD, it's only logical to compare them then.

Compare, sure, I guess. But to act like it's an even notable part of the package is just ridiculous. The single-player does nothing to drag the rest of the game down, and instead just offers a relatively mediocre bonus that you can play if you're bored.

Romeo

30th Nov 2011, 02:07

Regenerating health takes so long to kick in and and regenerates so slowly that unless you're damaged while hoofing it from point to point, there's almost no chance that it will have any effect on combat outcomes by the time you find yourself near a medkit, which are still way more important than sitting around like an idiot waiting for your health to come back.

Faster-paced is just wrong, and based on what you seem to THINK the regenerating health is like, I don't think you've even played it.
I assure you, I have both played it, and continue to do so, on account of the fact I still own it. It's not that slowly, as a Sniper for example, it is still a better tactic than to simply set up camp and wait for your health. So they don't need the Support class. The Engineer is usually in a situation where he either hasn't been harmed, or is already dead (Vehicles), so they don't need the Support class. This leaves the possibility of either Assault or Support itself requiring medkits, and with the Assault class essentially being general combat units now with the medkits, they're effectively self-contained little units. Support in theory was supposed to be useful for its suppression, but it's been my experience that even with a well co-ordinated team, it's almost always better to simply field another Assault unit in their place. This is still besides the fact that the regeneration still does allow - and even endorse - the very thing it should avoid.

As for faster-paced, have you been online? Gone are the days of Battlefield 2, where slowly inching your way towards an objective was a far more viable tactic. Now with teammates sprinting headfirst to their deaths every time you turn around, your re-inforcements run out in the blink of an eye. I'm not sure if that's the game's fault or the fault of a larger community, but it cannot be denied that the pace of Battlefield 3 is way in excess of the second.

kelticfury

30th Nov 2011, 03:16

With that said, The Witcher 2 wins game of the year. I didn't even think that was open for debate.

Hmm I can't play witcher 2 on my craptop but I can play skyrim tweaked up til its gorgeous. So I'd call that a big downside against potential goty.

kelticfury

30th Nov 2011, 03:21

In a fair competition, no Bethesda game would be ever allowed in the first place because of the beta version they release and (most importantly) never fix.

Haven't played Skyrim yet? Its stable and solid, I have had one ctd in some 80 hrs of play. I have come across a couple of bugs, but the release notes for the patch tomorrow actually covers every bug I have hit.

Big surprise, and a welcome one.

imported_BoB_

30th Nov 2011, 03:44

I'm not so sure, there is already some problems with the size of the save. The more it grows, the more it has chance to provoke huge framerate drops and freezes. Exactly the same problem that was already there on Fallout 3 and Oblivion. It's funny because the patch released today is supposed to fix that, but they previously claimed (about the two other games) that it was a flaw between their engine and the PS3 hardware and they couldn't fix it, so I'm not really convince it would work to be honest.

Romeo

30th Nov 2011, 04:12

Haven't played Skyrim yet? Its stable and solid, I have had one ctd in some 80 hrs of play. I have come across a couple of bugs, but the release notes for the patch tomorrow actually covers every bug I have hit.

Big surprise, and a welcome one.
That's a lie, and you MUST know this. Now, granted a lot of the small bugs in the game are justifiable simply due to the scope of the game. Other things notso much. As has been said, PS3 Skyrims were plagued by issues that seemed to be linked to their harddrive. Xbox had issues too, although less so, and frankly, so does the PC. I know the patch is supposed to cover alot, but I'm willing to bet every penny to my name that a new glitch is found within 3 days of the patch going live.

I'm not so sure, there is already some problems with the size of the save. The more it grows, the more it has chance to provoke huge framerate drops and freezes. Exactly the same problem that was already there on Fallout 3 and Oblivion. It's funny because the patch released today is supposed to fix that, but they previously claimed (about the two other games) that it was a flaw between their engine and the PS3 hardware and they couldn't fix it, so I'm not really convince it would work to be honest.
Curious, I never had any issues with the save file in Oblivion... Then again, I was a PC player in that instance, was it more an issue with the PS3 version? As to everything else though: Yes. Yes to everything.

MaxxQ1

30th Nov 2011, 07:10

Haven't played Skyrim yet? Its stable and solid, I have had one ctd in some 80 hrs of play. I have come across a couple of bugs, but the release notes for the patch tomorrow actually covers every bug I have hit.

Big surprise, and a welcome one.

Lucky you. I've got almost 100 hours of play and over the past 5 days, I've had about 30-40 CTD's. I'm not *****ing a whole lot about it because 1) It's simple and easy enough to just restart the game (and at least I don't have to sit through 20+ seconds of forced ads ;) ), 2) I've gotten into the habit of quicksaving every 5 minutes, so it's not like I'm losing much gametime, and 3) I've seen a couple possible fixes to the problem (the game is glitched and only uses 2gb of available memory, even though I have 8gb and the game is supposed to be able to use 4gb), but have been too lazy to try them out.

IIRC, the new patch will address that issue, and TBH, I played today before work, and didn't have a single CTD. Also, when I just got home from work and fired up my comp, there was a new Catalyst Driver waiting for me to install. So maybe that will help out a bit as well, even though I just did a driver update a couple weeks ago.

I've also have had several textures go missing. My dog ended up looking like he was made of lavender plastic, and the jail cell that shows up on the loading screen occasionally also popped up minus textures. I occasionally go swimming, and the water just disappears, so it looks like I'm swimming in midair. Of course, none of these issues are gamebreaking - just annoying at worst and hilarious at best.

But to say the game is stable and solid, especially when the way you say it implies that it's a fact and that anyone who has troubles is either stupid or lying, is disingenous. *You* got lucky, and I'm not pissed about it, because in the past, with many other games, I was the one who never had a single issue that anyone complained about. This is the first time I've been on the other side, and rather than ranting about it, I'm taking it in stride. As long as it's not a gamebreaking issue, I'll deal with it... eventually.

imported_BoB_

30th Nov 2011, 08:46

Curious, I never had any issues with the save file in Oblivion... Then again, I was a PC player in that instance, was it more an issue with the PS3 version? As to everything else though: Yes. Yes to everything.

Yeah, Bethesda's team doesn't know how to develop on PS3 apparently. Besides, I'm pretty sure that they know how buggy their games are, and that they purposely ship 360/PC version to reviewers to be sure to resist the first few weeks when everyone goes "best game ever" and that the hype is at his strongest. There is also problems on these versions obviously, but never as bad percentage-wise, it seems (because their engine is PC-oriented so it must be more compatible with 360 hardware from the get go)

Here (http://www.gamesradar.com/high-horse-broken-ps3-skyrim-was-inevitable-inexcusable-and-may-be-your-fault/) is an article about the problem on the PS3, he talks about Fallout 3/New Vegas briefly too, but it was already the same on Oblivion.

kelticfury

30th Nov 2011, 16:06

That's a lie, and you MUST know this. Now, granted a lot of the small bugs in the game are justifiable simply due to the scope of the game. Other things notso much. As has been said, PS3 Skyrims were plagued by issues that seemed to be linked to their harddrive. Xbox had issues too, although less so, and frankly, so does the PC. I know the patch is supposed to cover alot, but I'm willing to bet every penny to my name that a new glitch is found within 3 days of the patch going live.

Curious, I never had any issues with the save file in Oblivion... Then again, I was a PC player in that instance, was it more an issue with the PS3 version? As to everything else though: Yes. Yes to everything.

Well calling me a liar is going way over the top. I play it on pc and what I said is plain and simple truth. You have no means to judge my experiences and you crossed a serious line there.

kelticfury

30th Nov 2011, 16:12

3) I've seen a couple possible fixes to the problem (the game is glitched and only uses 2gb of available memory, even though I have 8gb and the game is supposed to be able to use 4gb), but have been too lazy to try them out.

This might help your skyrim 2g mem issue Skyrim Nexus 4g fix by the guy who made the one for fallout (http://www.skyrimnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=1013)

And sure, I may just be lucky, but I can't tell you about things that I am not experiencing, so *shrug* for me Skyrim is the most stable bethesda game I have played to date. sorry its sucking for you.

Romeo

30th Nov 2011, 16:15

Well calling me a liar is going way over the top. I play it on pc and what I said is plain and simple truth. You have no means to judge my experiences and you crossed a serious line there.
You didn't refer to your particular gamesave. You said "It is stable and solid". The game is not, not by a long shot. Don't think you're trying to lie, but it is still a lie, whether intentional or not.

MaxxQ1

30th Nov 2011, 16:27

This might help your skyrim 2g mem issue Skyrim Nexus 4g fix by the guy who made the one for fallout (http://www.skyrimnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=1013)

And sure, I may just be lucky, but I can't tell you about things that I am not experiencing, so *shrug* for me Skyrim is the most stable bethesda game I have played to date. sorry its sucking for you.

I didn't say it was sucking for me. I simply stated that the game most definitely is *not* "solid and stable". I don't really give a rat's ass if it's stable for you, my point was that the way you said everything you did made it seem like those of us who don't have a "solid and stable" experience are liars.

This is the thing that irritates me most about gaming - people who have no issues write/speak like those who *do* are lying, incompetent, or trolling, and those who *do* have issue with a game act like those who don't are lying, condescending, or trolling.

Funnily enough, not ten minutes after I made that earlier post, I was playing and had a CTD. And now I hear that the PS3 version of the 1.2 patch has borked the elemental resistances - even if you take a resistance potion, you don't get the fire/frost resistance you should - oh, and flame atronach's now take damage from flame spells. Same for frost atronachs with frost spells. Haven't yet seen if it has the same effect on PC or 360.

So much for consoles being more stable and easier to develop for than PCs...:rolleyes:

kelticfury

30th Nov 2011, 18:01

well steam just forced the pc update even though i told it not to update skyrim, I'll give it a go and see just how horrible it is.

MaxxQ1

30th Nov 2011, 18:07

well steam just forced the pc update even though i told it not to update skyrim, I'll give it a go and see just how horrible it is.

Odd... I just read on the Beth/Skyrim forums that Beth removed the patch from their servers - I assume because of the problems caused.

Unless the patch Steam loaded is a new and improved 1.2 patch... <shrug>

Romeo

30th Nov 2011, 20:24

Might also be a "dummy update". I've had Steam do that with Dawn of War II. Where there was a patch planned, but Relic realized it might cause more headaches, so a "patch" went through that changed absolutely nothing. I guess if Steam gets told there's a patch, is has to force the update for online multiplayer or some such thing? Anyways, like I said, occasionally the patch is to patch the game exactly as it was pre-patch, wouldn't fret too much.

Sirandar

30th Nov 2011, 23:44

I found Deus Ex to be a much better game than Skyrim.

Skyrim has an absolutely first rate gameworld, it is beautiful to explore ...... but the quests and NPCs are only 1/2 done at best.

As with Oblivion .... it is a great gamewold with very little to do and nothing much that matters.

Modders may be able to fix this but they will have to gut the existing quests and expand on them to make them interesting and maybe add a few of their own

kelticfury

1st Dec 2011, 15:22

Might also be a "dummy update". I've had Steam do that with Dawn of War II. Where there was a patch planned, but Relic realized it might cause more headaches, so a "patch" went through that changed absolutely nothing. I guess if Steam gets told there's a patch, is has to force the update for online multiplayer or some such thing? Anyways, like I said, occasionally the patch is to patch the game exactly as it was pre-patch, wouldn't fret too much.

Oh how I wish it was a dummy update.

These are my findings, copied from another thread:

The new patch is a nightmare. You pretty much have to remove all your mods, esp files, and delete your skyrim.ini and skyrimprefs.ini in order for your up/down on the mouse to work at all and even then the up/down is several notches more sensitive than left and right, with no way to change it. Elemental resistances are completely negated, even if you have 75% ele protect, it doesn't work at all. You can kill monsters immune to an element with that element. I haven't seen any dragons flying backwards yet, but I am sure it is on its way. FPS has dropped by 5-10 frames depending on location. shadows still look like crap.

I have managed to minimize the fps loss through vigorous editting of skyrimprefs.ini and a couple of line changes in skyrim.ini, and have had to completely deactivate antistropy and aa but the mouse is simply un-fixable. there is no way to change the sensitivity on the up/down. And you really feel that loss of elemental resistance when a dragon blasts you for 300 damage in a single breath.

The 1.2 patch is a complete horrorshow, and i feel for the casual gamers who have no idea how to minimalize its impact. I am certain that this has made the game unplayable for many. Oh and steam forces you to patch even if you have set it not to update. KEEP STEAM IN OFFLINE MODE if you haven't already been knackered by the forced update.

Oh yeah, and they disabled the arrow keys. I have no idea what they were thinking, and I am extremely peeved that they patched (what was for me a stable and enjoyable game) and turned it into a broken POS.

Romeo

1st Dec 2011, 21:47

OH DEAR GOD. I've seen some poorly thought out patches, but that one looks to be of nightmare proportions...

Ouch. =(

MaxxQ1

1st Dec 2011, 22:48

OH DEAR GOD. I've seen some poorly thought out patches, but that one looks to be of nightmare proportions...

Ouch. =(

CopyPasta'd my post in the Other Games... thread:

A response from Beth about the 1.2 patch (indirectly) and future updates: http://forums.bethsoft.com/index.php?/topic/1300556-skyrim-what-were-working-on/

Posted Today, 03:49 PM

From Bethblog

As of today, it’s been three weeks since we released Skyrim worldwide. We’re simply blown away by the response, from new and old fans, and amazed by the sheer number of people playing the game. It’s been absolutely fantastic hearing your stories, seeing early mods, and watching fan videos (more live music ones please, we love those).

We want to thank everyone reading this for playing our game and supporting all it tries to do. We wouldn’t have this success without you, and we want you to know we’re committed to making your Skyrim experience even better. And not just in the short term, but over the life of the game. Here’s a quick peek at what we’re working on right now:

Creation Kit— Beginning in January, PC players will be able to download the same development tools we used at Bethesda Game Studios to create Skyrim. In tandem with the Creation Kit’s release, we will roll out a new Wiki and videos to help you get started. It also features something we think you’re going to love…

Steam Workshop – We’re excited to share news that we’ve been working closely with Valve to integrate Steam Workshop into the Creation Kit. Using the Workshop, you’ll have free user content with the push of a button. The Creation Kit will bundle your mod and upload it to the Workshop, where everyone can browse, rate, and flag mods for download. You’ll be able to do this from any web device, including your smartphone. Like a live Netflix queue, when you fire up Skyrim, mods you flagged will be automatically downloaded and installed. Everyone here is really excited about the opportunities and possibilities this opens up for our entire community.

Prefer to use existing modding sites? Not a problem. You’ll still be able to upload/share/access Skyrim mods on fan-created mod sites.

Continued Game Updates – This week we released update 1.2 across all platforms, and we’ll be releasing an incremental update next week. We anticipate it will be up on PC first, and then hit PS3 and Xbox 360 later in the week. Among other things, the update will fix issues like magic resistance not calculating properly and the rare, amazing backwards flying dragon. Once the update is released, we’ll share the full release notes.

After the holidays, we’ll continue to release regular updates for the game — through full title updates, as well as incremental “gameplay updates” to fix whatever issues come up along with rebalancing portions of the game for difficulty or exploits. We plan on having a lot of these, not just a few. Overall, you should expect updates to be hitting the PC and Steam earlier and more often, as that’s a process we control. Console updates will follow, as they must be certified and processed by those manufacturers.

We all know this is a huge game, and everyone has a different experience. We’ll continue to do everything we can to make the game better and better for as many people as possible every day. We’ve also realized that with the millions upon millions of people playing Skyrim, we need to treat our updates with greater care. If we get too aggressive trying to fix a minor issue, we run a risk of breaking something larger in a game like this. To be safe, we are prioritizing code side fixes right now over data fixes. Quest and balance issues are usually data, and those will start rolling in a large way with the January updates.

Thanks again for your continued support and patience. We truly have the best fans in the world, and we couldn’t do it without you.

Cue Kodaemon commenting about Steam Workshop in 3... 2...

Rocket Propelled Rocket

2nd Dec 2011, 01:53

Right off the bat, if your argument is "your stupid", you've lost already (Bonus marks for screwing up the grammer while insulting someone else's intelligence).

Grammar*
Just sayin'.

PellaeonSZ

2nd Dec 2011, 03:10

I'm a die-hard fan of both the Deus Ex and Elder Scrolls series. Played and finished Deus Ex 1 and 2, and played both Morrowind (did not finish for some reason) and Oblivion (invested 2 years on it lol - finished).

Deus Ex 1 and Oblivion, in my humble opinion are the top 2 best single-player games ever made. I love the stories, the quests, and the open-world feeling I experienced from both. Both were ground-breaking in many ways. Skyrim has a lot of promise too, but the bugs, glitches and patches are making the PC version unplayable. I had placed Deus Ex: HR on hold until after I was done with Skyrim, but I decided to purchase DEHR a couple of days ago after Skyrim patch 1.2 came out and ruined the game even further. As for which game is better: I don't know. Skyrim is obviously "bigger" in scope, but Deus Ex's story and ways to play the game will probably be kick-ass too. I'm just glad both games were created and I get to enjoy playing them again.

While it is true that both games are being dumbed down, this is something we need to get used to. Right now consoles are king, and games are being created with the consoles in mind. Also, companies are catering to a larger audience of players that need simpler games. But still, both Skyrim and DEHR offer us many ways to play the game to make it either easier and dumbed down, or harder and more complex. In Skyrim I love to explore the map and find new places, but I also like fast travelling after clearing 2 or 3 caves, dungeons, and mines. What I do not like is the many exploits that can make your character pretty much invincible (smithing/enchanting). This is the reason why I did not finish Morrowind. I hope that the next patches balance the game even more, and fix things such as companions not leveling up with you, spell resistances, speechcraft conversation exploits, etc.

As for DEHR, I just started playing, and I hope that there aren't too many glitches, bugs, or exploits. And I hope that the story is at least nearly as awesome as Deus Ex 1. Both games are suffering from lag/stutter/framerate issues, which make it hard for either to be voted as GOTY in my book. I don't have a Wii and have never played it, but based on reviews Zelda: Skyward Sword or w/e seems to be the front-runner if we look at it from a best game that doesn't have glitches perspective. But again, I'm grateful that I'll spend the next year or so playing both Skyrim (when it's fixed) and DEHR!

itsonyourhead

2nd Dec 2011, 03:30

While it is true that both games are being dumbed down, this is something we need to get used to. Right now consoles are king, and games are being created with the consoles in mind. Also, companies are catering to a larger audience of players that need simpler games.

Stop perpetuating a misconception.

The idea that the average gamer needs a simpler game is an unfounded supposition.

Romeo

2nd Dec 2011, 06:04

Stop perpetuating a misconception.

The idea that the average gamer needs a simpler game is an unfounded supposition.
Thank you. I play console for most of my genres, and the last thing I want is a simplified game. Just as there are plenty of PC gamers involved in the casual market. Gamers are gamers.

PellaeonSZ

2nd Dec 2011, 07:13

Thank you. I play console for most of my genres, and the last thing I want is a simplified game. Just as there are plenty of PC gamers involved in the casual market. Gamers are gamers.

I didn't say that that's what I want. That's what a large chunk of the new gaming generation wants.
If the average gamer doesn't want a dumbed down game, then why are most companies leaning that way? Everything happens for a reason. Look at CoD MW 3. Crappy single player campaign, and the multiplayer is almost identical to MW 2. Several million copies sold. Get your achievements, then wait a few months until the next CoD is released. Rinse and repeat. No need for innovation, complexity, or a great story. And it beat Skyrim and DEHR in sales combined.

I chose to buy both Skyrim and Deus Ex for the PC because of mod capabilities, especially for Skyrim. I like my games to be full of detail and complexity. I also like that the PC's look even better than consoles graphics-wise. I'm not stupid enough to think that 100% of gamers don't want games to be dumbed down. But gaming companies usually cater to the masses, and today's western society isn't known for patience, not even for games.

Simplicity = less time to beat a game before moving on to the next set of console achievements.

Romeo

2nd Dec 2011, 10:02

I didn't say that that's what I want. That's what a large chunk of the new gaming generation wants.
If the average gamer doesn't want a dumbed down game, then why are most companies leaning that way? Everything happens for a reason. Look at CoD MW 3. Crappy single player campaign, and the multiplayer is almost identical to MW 2. Several million copies sold. Get your achievements, then wait a few months until the next CoD is released. Rinse and repeat. No need for innovation, complexity, or a great story. And it beat Skyrim and DEHR in sales combined.

I chose to buy both Skyrim and Deus Ex for the PC because of mod capabilities, especially for Skyrim. I like my games to be full of detail and complexity. I also like that the PC's look even better than consoles graphics-wise. I'm not stupid enough to think that 100% of gamers don't want games to be dumbed down. But gaming companies usually cater to the masses, and today's western society isn't known for patience, not even for games.

Simplicity = less time to beat a game before moving on to the next set of console achievements.
You misinterpret me: I wasn't calling you out there, nor assuming you had said you hated "group x or group y". Like you, I want my large, complex, breathing worlds. I disagree with you in saying the average gamer doesn't want that, sadly, they do. That's why Angry Birds also outsells Deus Ex and Skyrim combined, or to look at it a different way: The entire Elder Scrolls series combined. And not to instigate the CoD vs BF arguments, but bare with me here for a moment: If most gamers were against simplification, BF3 would've outsold MW3 for one simple fact - They're almost identical games, just Battlefield has the added factors of class and destruction. Despite that, it wasn't just beaten by Modern Warfare 3, it was annihilated by it.

What I don't understand is why games can't take a page out of automobiles: Sure, with automobiles, there are a ton of "casual" vehicles (Cruze, Fiesta, Fit, 500, ForTwo) for those who just want the basics, which are similar to 99 cent apps. We also have the slightly more "core" vehicles, such as the Challenger, Mustang, Camaro, 370Z and G37. Those would be akin to you Call of Duty and Battlefield games. They're full price, but they can be reliably expected to sell. Where cars have a massive advantage over games I find, is that as a car guy, I can find a car that doesn't do a thing to simplify things for me: The Viper is a manually-only, non-ABS, non-Traction Control monster. The Ford GT is a manual-only, mid-engined race car for the street. The Corvette is a barely-tamed excuse to get a chassis for LeMans races. The MC12 Corsa took all the nice bits of an Enzo and made them better by making everything manually controlled. The F430 Scuderia took the stock 430 and removed all assists for the driver, and lightened it up by removing unnecessary things like the radio and spare tire. My point is, as a car guy you can find the "user does everything" complex experience very easily. It's a niche market, but manufacturers have realized that it's safer to release a car that has 100% of the market, that only appeals to 10% of the population, than it is to compete against nine other car makers for 100% of the market. Not only does such a market exist, they thrive. When the recession hit, and Volkswagen needed a bail-out, it was niche-manufacturer Porsche who came to their rescue. When GM couldn't afford to keep Saab, it was ultra-niche market maker Koeniggsegg that rushed in to save them. Despite this, companies such as Activision, EA and THQ are becoming increasingly more focused on that "mid-range" kind of game. They're taking the Ford Fiesta, Ford Mustang and Ford GT and turning them all into the Ford Mustang, much to the detriment of the customer.

kelticfury

2nd Dec 2011, 16:50

These "new gamers" aren't gamers at all, they are jocks and townies and clubbers and such that play some titles on consoles. Consoles are now a household appliance, as common as a tv. Real gamers, as far as I am concerned are people like us, that lurk game forums, know that ini files even exist, and have opinions and thoughts about story and content etc. Yeah sure, real gamers use consoles also, but as far as what the mass market is aiming at, my friends, it is not us, its Joe clubby jockster that gets a chubby from CoD.

zenstar

2nd Dec 2011, 17:34

Sorry.. I just popped in to see how the argument was going (boiling along nicely) and I thought I saw someone use the words "Stable" and "Bethesda game" in the same sentence without any negation or irony.
I guess I must have been drinking really, really hard at work today to have my eyes lie to me so severely and forget that I've been drinking at work today.

I don't think Bethesda has ever released something that anyone would describe as stable unless they were being paid to do so.
They may release some fun games and those games may work as expected on some PCs but they always need a rash of patches to keep their innards umm.. -in-, and they are never the paragon of stability.
If there were truth in advertising I think Bethesda's tagline would be -
Bethesda: our games don't normally crash that badly.

kelticfury

2nd Dec 2011, 18:52

Sorry.. I just popped in to see how the argument was going (boiling along nicely) and I thought I saw someone use the words "Stable" and "Bethesda game" in the same sentence without any negation or irony.

Read farther down, what was playing perfectly fine for me got destroyed by their "patch".

Romeo

2nd Dec 2011, 20:59

These "new gamers" aren't gamers at all, they are jocks and townies and clubbers and such that play some titles on consoles. Consoles are now a household appliance, as common as a tv. Real gamers, as far as I am concerned are people like us, that lurk game forums, know that ini files even exist, and have opinions and thoughts about story and content etc. Yeah sure, real gamers use consoles also, but as far as what the mass market is aiming at, my friends, it is not us, its Joe clubby jockster that gets a chubby from CoD.
They are still gamers, I don't agree with you there. In the same sense someone who commutes to work everyday and has a license is a driver. They may not be as "hardcore" as a racecar driver, but being that they're the majority of people, the industry will inevitably cater to them. As I said, the issue is not that there's a whole plethora of new people getting in to gaming casually - just the opposite, I'm all for that. What I'm not in favour of is the industry mixing up "majority" and "literally everyone". There still needs to be an outlet for those of us who remember the days where a game didn't bow down to you, where you needed to adapt to have a chance. Having taken that out is really a detriment not only to the players, but to the designers as well. How many studios went down this year? Of course you're going to fail heading up against the juggernaut that is Call of Duty. This is why, for example, I think Syndicate is doomed to fail. Another RTS would've had almost no competition to deal with (Starcraft II is the only major one due out for quite some time). A FPS shooter has a whole sea of games to try and muscle with for market space.

Tverdyj

3rd Dec 2011, 00:20

While it is true that both games are being dumbed down, this is something we need to get used to. Right now consoles are king, and games are being created with the consoles in mind. Also, companies are catering to a larger audience of players that need simpler games. But still, both Skyrim and DEHR offer us many ways to play the game to make it either easier and dumbed down, or harder and more complex. In Skyrim I love to explore the map and find new places, but I also like fast travelling after clearing 2 or 3 caves, dungeons, and mines. What I do not like is the many exploits that can make your character pretty much invincible (smithing/enchanting). This is the reason why I did not finish Morrowind. I hope that the next patches balance the game even more, and fix things such as companions not leveling up with you, spell resistances, speechcraft conversation exploits, etc.

I'm sure glad I live in a world where developers like CDProjectRed don't believe this and release complex games aimed at PCs.
and only later port them to consoles.

Zoet

3rd Dec 2011, 04:27

...That's why Angry Birds also outsells Deus Ex and Skyrim combined, or to look at it a different way: The entire Elder Scrolls series combined...

Ah, I remember when Angry Birds was released, back then it was just another little 'indie' game, with the developers answering users questions on the toucharcade.com forums, promising to implement leader-boards soon, and maybe some new levels if all went well... ;)

They are still gamers, I don't agree with you there. In the same sense someone who commutes to work everyday and has a license is a driver. They may not be as "hardcore" as a racecar driver, but being that they're the majority of people, the industry will inevitably cater to them. As I said, the issue is not that there's a whole plethora of new people getting in to gaming casually - just the opposite, I'm all for that. What I'm not in favour of is the industry mixing up "majority" and "literally everyone". There still needs to be an outlet for those of us who remember the days where a game didn't bow down to you, where you needed to adapt to have a chance. Having taken that out is really a detriment not only to the players, but to the designers as well. How many studios went down this year? Of course you're going to fail heading up against the juggernaut that is Call of Duty. This is why, for example, I think Syndicate is doomed to fail. Another RTS would've had almost no competition to deal with (Starcraft II is the only major one due out for quite some time). A FPS shooter has a whole sea of games to try and muscle with for market space.

Skyrim is a bit of an anomaly in this regard: all of the kids at my younger brother's highschool are playing it, when they would never usually touch a similar game like Fallout 3/New Vegas or Oblivion. Not one of them has played DX:HR :(

Syndicate looks generally uninspired. It is quite entertaining to see comments on articles about it saying that it looks like a 'cheap DX:HR knockoff', so if Syndicate turns out just as limp at it looks (basing all of this on the trailer of course), it might actually help DX to become the 'owner' of its particular genre niche.

Romeo

3rd Dec 2011, 05:49

I don't think Syndicate has a chance versus either Deus Ex, or it's predessor. Again, I cannot for the life of me fathom why EA took an RTS game - a genre which really only has one major release expected within the next 12 months - and instead turned it in to yet another FPS. A genre which is so densely populated that the overwhelming majority of entries in it are fiscal failures.

zenstar

3rd Dec 2011, 17:00

Read farther down, what was playing perfectly fine for me got destroyed by their "patch".

Ah Bethesda ^_^ they're certainly are not going to let their bad name down.

Devs: we haven't quite finished the game. We need another round of QA and bugfixing and then it'll be great.
Bethesda: No! Master requires more shiny shiny. You sell now and we advertise you hard.
D: But we'll just need to patch it on day 1.
B. Yesss! The ritual demands day 1 patches. And virgins. And shiny shiny. Make us lots of shiny shiny.

Basically the same thing happens with patches, only the game has already been released and the patches are an excuse to push the advertising trolley again and try convince more people to buy the game now that it's been "fixed".

Unfortunately, when it comes to Bethesda the term 'fixed' is normally used the same way you say that your dog has been 'fixed' when in reality he no longer functions properly.

ZakKa89

4th Dec 2011, 04:14

I don't think Syndicate has a chance versus either Deus Ex, or it's predessor. Again, I cannot for the life of me fathom why EA took an RTS game - a genre which really only has one major release expected within the next 12 months - and instead turned it in to yet another FPS. A genre which is so densely populated that the overwhelming majority of entries in it are fiscal failures.

You still have the new Jagged Alliance to look forward to.

Romeo

4th Dec 2011, 08:10

You still have the new Jagged Alliance to look forward to.
Jagged Alliance isn't out in the next 12 months, according to their publisher. And Heart of the Swarm is anyone's guess, but like wont be out within next the next year. Command and Conquer 5 and Dawn of War III haven't been officially announced yet. As I said, the market is WIDE OPEN for a new RTS.

ZakKa89

4th Dec 2011, 23:42

I think we'll see company of heroes 2 before dawn of 3.
And yes the market needs a new rts, FAST.

Romeo

4th Dec 2011, 23:58

I think we'll see company of heroes 2 before dawn of 3.
And yes the market needs a new rts, FAST.
Indeed. RPGs have Skyrim, Dark Souls and Zelda: Skyward Sword to tide us over for while. Racing we have Forza 4, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit and the new Ridge Racer to cover all bases. Platforming is getting a new Lara Croft, as well as the relatively common releases of Mario and Sonic. Shooters have... Well, a ton of releases, but with single player emphasis there's Hitman, Mass Effect 3 and of course, Deus Ex. RTS has... Nothing. The market is just bone dry it seems. That's not to say there isn't any games coming out at all for it, but there's no "major" releases due out any time soon.

imported_BoB_

5th Dec 2011, 01:51

About the Skyrim problems that exist since Oblivion, there is this interview of the Project Director on New Vegas (http://forums.bethsoft.com/index.php?/topic/1303536-new-vegas-developer-comments-on-ps3-lag-issues/) and he explains how it's gonna get only worse for PS3 players and why it doesn't work well on PS3, but that it's basically the engine that sucks.

(and the thread is on Bethesda's official forum, if customers aren't convinced that Bethesda absolutely don't give a **** about them after that...)

itsonyourhead

5th Dec 2011, 05:22

Indeed. RPGs have Skyrim, Dark Souls and Zelda: Skyward Sword to tide us over for while. Racing we have Forza 4, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit and the new Ridge Racer to cover all bases. Platforming is getting a new Lara Croft, as well as the relatively common releases of Mario and Sonic. Shooters have... Well, a ton of releases, but with single player emphasis there's Hitman, Mass Effect 3 and of course, Deus Ex. RTS has... Nothing. The market is just bone dry it seems. That's not to say there isn't any games coming out at all for it, but there's no "major" releases due out any time soon.

Well, I think Blizzard Activision plans to continue to milk Star Craft 2. Never could get into the Star Craft games myself. But I know a few people who like them.

Romeo

5th Dec 2011, 15:46

Well, I think Blizzard Activision plans to continue to milk Star Craft 2. Never could get into the Star Craft games myself. But I know a few people who like them.
I hear people say that, and frankly I think that's because people hear "expansions" and instantly assume cash grab. Most people seem to be ignoring that Wings of Liberty was already longer than the original Starcraft, on top of the fact they had the added RPG elememts, challenge mode and modeled/animated/put in to the editor several of the classic units and even april fools jokes. Then there's the slew of mods Blizzard has done up and given away. On top of the free editor as well, which they made more user-friendly for the fans. Plus Heart of the Swarm is going to be priced as an expansion as opposed to a full game, despite having a new campaign as long Wings of Liberty, a slew of new units and evolutions and whatnot.

Gotta run against you on this one POM. I think Blizzard is a beacon on how to treat fans, I wish we had more companies like them.

Ashpolt

5th Dec 2011, 16:30

I hear people say that, and frankly I think that's because people hear "expansions" and instantly assume cash grab. Most people seem to be ignoring that Wings of Liberty was already longer than the original Starcraft, on top of the fact they had the added RPG elememts, challenge mode and modeled/animated/put in to the editor several of the classic units and even april fools jokes. Then there's the slew of mods Blizzard has done up and given away. On top of the free editor as well, which they made more user-friendly for the fans. Plus Heart of the Swarm is going to be priced as an expansion as opposed to a full game, despite having a new campaign as long Wings of Liberty, a slew of new units and evolutions and whatnot.

Gotta run against you on this one POM. I think Blizzard is a beacon on how to treat fans, I wish we had more companies like them.

I agree with this (except for the bit where you got fooled by itsonyourhead's avatar - he's not POM!) My first reaction to the announcement that SC2 was being split into three games was "shameless cash grab", but at least judging by Wings of Liberty I'm glad to say I was wrong. It's a wonderfully generous game which has given me more hours of joy in the past couple of years than any other, barring possibly Minecraft. The single player is not only suitably lengthy but also stunningly well done, particularly by RTS standards, and the multiplayer is...well, it's Starcraft multiplayer. Nothing more needs to be said. If Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void are even a patch on Wings of Liberty, they'll be more than worth the money, especially if they really are released at expansion pack prices (but even so if not.)

Romeo

5th Dec 2011, 18:36

I agree with this (except for the bit where you got fooled by itsonyourhead's avatar - he's not POM!) My first reaction to the announcement that SC2 was being split into three games was "shameless cash grab", but at least judging by Wings of Liberty I'm glad to say I was wrong. It's a wonderfully generous game which has given me more hours of joy in the past couple of years than any other, barring possibly Minecraft. The single player is not only suitably lengthy but also stunningly well done, particularly by RTS standards, and the multiplayer is...well, it's Starcraft multiplayer. Nothing more needs to be said. If Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void are even a patch on Wings of Liberty, they'll be more than worth the money, especially if they really are released at expansion pack prices (but even so if not.)
I'm actually most looking forward to Heart of the Swarm, as I've always been a defensive Zerg player (Yeah, let your mind try and figure that one out!) Wings of Liberty was amazing, and Heart of the Swarm looks to be even better, I can't wait to get my selfish little hands on it and lock myself in to my room for a few weeks.

And are you sure it isn't him? Same avatar and signature, and even similar methods of speaking? I'm pretty sure he's POM 2: The POMmening.